RE: [MACCAWS] Webmonkey article: Web Standards for Hard Times

--- Ryan Christensen <[email protected]> wrote:
> This brings up a point:
> 
> As it was said on diveintomark.org
> (http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/08/05.html#rounded_corners)
> regarding the css box-corners template that was whipped up
> (http://www.albin.net/CSS/roundedCorners/) and mentioned on
> css-d/etc.
> 
> --------------------
> But I count three CSS hacks, two levels of nested divs, one markup
> hack,
> and a partridge in a pear tree to get it all working. Apparently
> we've
> traded a big stinking pile of table tricks for a big stinking pile
> of
> CSS tricks. It's not more semantically pure, it's not more
> accessible,
> it's not easier to maintain. Why is this progress?
> --------------------
> 
> He has a very good point here. What I'm asking is: Should we be
> pushing
> workarounds/hacks to work WITH the older browsers, or settle with
> (possibly) less visually appealing & precise layouts which ARE
> cleanly
> laid out but still remain W3C compliant.
> 
> Thoughts? Am I even making sense? ;)
> 
> Ryan


Ryan, you are making sense - and I think this is one of our key
challenges. I went through the same frustrations myself working on my
own personal site. I could have had it done in one day using tables.
Instead, it took me days to really get it where I wanted.

Sometimes the savings is not on the front end of the job. Taking my
site as an example, now when I want to change things its going to be
a snap. For me, there's the savings - and the nice thing is - it will
add up over time.

For some time to come (years, for sure) there are going to be hacks
in whatever you do - lets face it. The box model hack, nested divs
are going to be part of life for awhile - but they will phase out.

There is going to be a learning curve for developers and clients
alike. This doesn't change our mission of showing the viability of
standards. We know where the savings comes in, we have to show it.

And remember our conversations about "intermediate stages." Take a
look at W3Schools sites

(http://www.w3schools.com/css/)

They are XHTML1.0 validated and CSS validated..AND they use tables
for layout. Fine. We're not saying you can't do that. They are still
far better off than the old way. Its a giant step in the right
direction.

Tom

=====
var me = tom.pixelmech.webDeveloper();

http://www.pixelmech.com/
http://www.maccaws.com/
[Making A Commercial Case for Adopting Web Standards]

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com