>tons of edge cases, dialects, and straight up absurd rules (Buffalo buffalo..). It's a language primarily improved through experience and memory. Yeah, I'd su

>tons of edge cases, dialects, and straight up absurd rules (Buffalo buffalo..). It's a language primarily improved through experience and memory. Yeah, I'd sum it up by saying CSS makes hard things barely possible and simple things hard. The example OP gave of centering divs illustrates this point, and there are unnecessary weaknesses in laying out a page when, for example, sizes aren't known in advance. Overall, there's a divide between intuitive expression and output, wherein the browser ends up saying things like, "I won't do this (e.g. center) unless you also do that (e.g. tell me how big it is)." Really? Why? In all, it's never been an efficient solution to the problem it seeks to solve. When the Great War on Table-based Layouts broke out, it was even less suitable, which made it even more painful that you were persona non grata for resisting. So, rather than demand a better standard and uniform browser support, we just hacked and kludged and shimmed around it. So, the need to support the legacy has made it even more impractical to fix, hence the attempted do-over with flexbox. CSS has been the bane of front-end development for many a dev. Amazing that we largely just suffer through it, and its tyranny has reigned for so long.