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

Thus spake Ryan Christensen:

> You know, in reading this I'm sort of realizing that the comment I
> brought up, and the discussion that has started from it is more or less
> irrelevant (correct me if I'm wrong.)

I think you're exactly right. Standards != <table>less layout != no hacks.
Pushing standards is great. Pushing <table>less layouts, maybe not so great
in some situations. Pushing no hacks is begging for trouble.

I can't think of many layouts that couldn't be accomplished using only valid
code. Marginwidth/height can be a pain to get rid of, but other than that I
don't see a problem.

CSS-only layouts--particularly liquid ones--take some expertise, but they
can be done. Whether they're right for your site or not is really an
implementation-specific issue.

As far as hacks go, I'm not sure I'm understanding why a few lines of valid
CSS (no, they don't all validate but I've not found a reason to use the
invalid hacks yet) in one or two CSS files is so much worse than sprinkling
extraneous markup throughout hundreds, maybe thousands of pages. Then again,
I don't /have/ to understand. I've elected to use a different methodology.
It's good to discuss the pros and cons of each, but at the end of the day
we're both writing valid, accessible code and /that/ is the important thing.

As far as CSS-only eye-candy goes, I wrote an article on the topic:

<http://www.westciv.com/style_master/house/good_oil/banality_of_radical/inde
x.html>

That more or less sums up my ideas on the issue.


chris.kaminski == ( design | code | analysis )

------------------------------------------------------------
    The only people left who are surprised by
    the public's distrust of the media, are
    media people themselves.
    ------------------------------------------<< sansbury >>