3 ms·

Programmer == backend html // designer = AI/PS/CSS cutter, and css writer When I view source csszengarden this is what I see: <div id="intro"> <div id="pa

by iroboto 18y ago

Programmer == backend html // designer = AI/PS/CSS cutter, and css writer When I view source csszengarden this is what I see: <div id="intro"> <div id="pageHeader"> <h1> <h2><acronym> <div id="quickSummary"> <p class="p1"><acronym> <p class="p2"> <div id="premable"> <h3> <p class="p1"> <p class="p2"> <p class="p3"> <div id="supportingText"> etc etc. And it goes on. All I see are information grouped by content. The ids, and class tags describe the information. The paragraphs are ordered p1,p2,p3, because for them to make sense they have to be in that order. Page header, quick summary and preamble are all items that belong to an introduction. I think it's great.

chairface 18y ago
In the source of csszengarden, do you also see this > There are more classes and extraneous tags than needed, and in a real world situation, it's more likely that it would be much leaner. and this >  <div id="linkList2"> and this >   <div id="extraDiv1"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv2"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv3"><span></span></div> <div id="extraDiv4"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv5"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv6"><span></span></div> The HTML guy could not be "nearly clueless" about the designer's needs if CSS Zen Garden's flexibility is what you're looking for.
- iroboto 18y ago
  Sure I see it. But your whole argument is on the basis points of 2 commented divs?  Add extra imagery -- it's posted at the bottom and away from the content. It's not like it's messing with what the programmer needs to develop. You could have easily have removed those tags and only the designs that decided to take use of them would get hurt -- but it is optional, not a requirement.  I thought we discussed that browsers incompatibilities are the reason for this. The core of the content is listed at the top of the HTML page which is organized properly. TBH: I would hardly call this level of adding extra markup anywhere close to other HTML where the presentation is completely ingrained.
  - chairface 18y ago
    > it's posted at the bottom and away from the content But it's HTML, and should therefore should BE content. But it's not; it's presentation. > I thought we discussed that browsers incompatibilities are the reason for this. You seem to be missing my point. If CSS, as implemented NOW, worked as advertised and offered a way to separate content from presentation while retaining flexibility, then we'd have no argument. I'd happily be using it for what is intended. You just can't do that now, and I'm tired of people telling me that I can. > I would hardly call this level of adding extra markup anywhere close to other HTML where the presentation is completely ingrained. Of course it's not completely ingrained. But I want it to be able to be completely separated before I'm going to join your camp.

by iroboto 18y ago

chairface 18y ago

In the source of csszengarden, do you also see this > There are more classes and extraneous tags than needed, and in a real world situation, it's more likely that it would be much leaner. and this >  <div id="linkList2"> and this >   <div id="extraDiv1"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv2"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv3"><span></span></div> <div id="extraDiv4"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv5"><span></span></div><div id="extraDiv6"><span></span></div> The HTML guy could not be "nearly clueless" about the designer's needs if CSS Zen Garden's flexibility is what you're looking for.

iroboto 18y ago
Sure I see it. But your whole argument is on the basis points of 2 commented divs?  Add extra imagery -- it's posted at the bottom and away from the content. It's not like it's messing with what the programmer needs to develop. You could have easily have removed those tags and only the designs that decided to take use of them would get hurt -- but it is optional, not a requirement.  I thought we discussed that browsers incompatibilities are the reason for this. The core of the content is listed at the top of the HTML page which is organized properly. TBH: I would hardly call this level of adding extra markup anywhere close to other HTML where the presentation is completely ingrained.
- chairface 18y ago
  > it's posted at the bottom and away from the content But it's HTML, and should therefore should BE content. But it's not; it's presentation. > I thought we discussed that browsers incompatibilities are the reason for this. You seem to be missing my point. If CSS, as implemented NOW, worked as advertised and offered a way to separate content from presentation while retaining flexibility, then we'd have no argument. I'd happily be using it for what is intended. You just can't do that now, and I'm tired of people telling me that I can. > I would hardly call this level of adding extra markup anywhere close to other HTML where the presentation is completely ingrained. Of course it's not completely ingrained. But I want it to be able to be completely separated before I'm going to join your camp.