4 ms·
Thanks for the nice counter-argument. I think you're probably right in practice. My opinion stems from two things. First, HMTL and CSS are trivially easy for m
by tedkimble 15y ago
Thanks for the nice counter-argument. I think you're probably right in practice.
My opinion stems from two things. First, HMTL and CSS are trivially easy for me and consume only a small fraction of time I spend on the design process. I imagine this applies to almost all of those who share the opinion that you must know HMTL and CSS to be a web designer. You make a strong argument that this is not a necessity to being a top-notch designer.
But where my passion in this debate really stems from is my recent experience completing a graduate program in architecture. We were mentored to experiment with our medium; to uncover the materials' latent properties and capabilities, incorporating a bottom-up design process. This was (and is) highly unusual and controversial. Opposed to this is a purely top-down process, subject to the whims and inspirations of a single designer. The idea and form come first, and they are then imposed on an inert medium.
I see parallels to web design. Photoshop enables top-down thinking. The web (through HTML and CSS) are inert -- they are at the will of whatever form Photoshop demands. But I see something different in the code. I see a rich source of inspiration. I see capabilities, limitations, and tendencies. I see a "charged" source of untapped potential.
It's true, there are many valid sources of inspiration outside of code. Most of them, actually. But if no designers looked to HMTL and CSS for inspiration, I think a lot of potential would be lost.