3 ms·

CSS rarely gets mentioned in skill assessment because it's more akin to a syntax than an actual language. Though this seems to be changing as more advanced feat

by wyck 13y ago

CSS rarely gets mentioned in skill assessment because it's more akin to a syntax than an actual language. Though this seems to be changing as more advanced features are added at a snails pace. None of your examples break anything, thought they should be considered if writing something from the ground up, maintenance is another story. CSS semantics don't even make it into the bug tracker unless you have nothing to do, or your sole job is to write CSS. There is always more important things to do. This is similar to how you can always spot a "new" web dev over how they obsess over WC3 validation. Sure it's important, but it's not that important.

ahallock 13y ago
I had a really hard time parsing your comment. Anyway, writing narrowly-scoped CSS speeds up development a lot. If you're fighting the specificity war, or have coupled your HTML and CSS too much (I don't at all), your front-end code will degrade over time to the point of being incomprehensible (in my experience). Your marginalizing of CSS-related work says to me that you haven't had to maintain large web apps, where CSS quality is that important.
- wyck 13y ago
  >Your marginalizing of CSS-related work says to me that you haven't had to maintain large web apps, where CSS quality is that important. This is my exact point, I have maintained large web apps that often have budgets and limited resources. I my experience they are always way more important pressing matters (aka actual bugs/features effecting revenue) then CSS semantics. There are companies out there that will of course deem this as important, but in my experience this has been a minority. Getting bogged down into the semantics of html/css can also be limiting, unless you really enjoy doing it, personally I hate CSS, it's an ends to a means and a bad one at that.
  - philipwalton 13y ago
    You pretty clearly didn't read the article. Semantics weren't discussed at all. The focus was on making the best of working with a language that has a limited feature set, and learning to reexamine long held best practices.
    - wyck 13y ago
      By semantic I am referring to the idea of "best method", the just of your article being, name things properly and don't create long nested selectors.

by wyck 13y ago

ahallock 13y ago

I had a really hard time parsing your comment. Anyway, writing narrowly-scoped CSS speeds up development a lot. If you're fighting the specificity war, or have coupled your HTML and CSS too much (I don't at all), your front-end code will degrade over time to the point of being incomprehensible (in my experience). Your marginalizing of CSS-related work says to me that you haven't had to maintain large web apps, where CSS quality is that important.

wyck 13y ago
>Your marginalizing of CSS-related work says to me that you haven't had to maintain large web apps, where CSS quality is that important. This is my exact point, I have maintained large web apps that often have budgets and limited resources. I my experience they are always way more important pressing matters (aka actual bugs/features effecting revenue) then CSS semantics. There are companies out there that will of course deem this as important, but in my experience this has been a minority. Getting bogged down into the semantics of html/css can also be limiting, unless you really enjoy doing it, personally I hate CSS, it's an ends to a means and a bad one at that.
- philipwalton 13y ago
  You pretty clearly didn't read the article. Semantics weren't discussed at all. The focus was on making the best of working with a language that has a limited feature set, and learning to reexamine long held best practices.
  - wyck 13y ago
    By semantic I am referring to the idea of "best method", the just of your article being, name things properly and don't create long nested selectors.