3 ms·
> Firstly, I find it hilarious that when I opened this blog post dissing CSS the author's 'responsive' design was completely and utterly fucked. That kind of p
by _pmf_ 12y ago
> Firstly, I find it hilarious that when I opened this blog post dissing CSS the author's 'responsive' design was completely and utterly fucked.
That kind of proves his point, though. If the foundational layout language for the web requires more than basic effort to create a responsive design, something with it is fundamentally rotten to the core.
- owenversteeg 12y ago> If the foundational layout language for the web requires more than basic effort to create a responsive design, something with it is fundamentally rotten to the core. CSS is a language. Like Haskell, C++, or Ruby, if you only put "basic effort" into learning it when you try to write some it will be absolute shit.
- _pmf_ 12y ago> CSS is a language. Like Haskell, C++, or Ruby, if you only put "basic effort" into learning it when you try to write some it will be absolute shit. CSS is not a general purpose programming language. A domain specific language is a failure if the most basic features of the domain cannot expressed with minimum complexity. THERE'S NO WAY TO CENTER THINGS VERTICALLY WITHOUT FALLING BACK ON HACKS, FOR GOD'S SAKE!
- owenversteeg 12y agoSure, it's not a general purpose language. As a result, writing decent CSS is easier than, writing, say, decent Haskell. But people have to put some effort into learning it or they'll get crap. I agree with you entirely re:vertically centering things, but that's one of a very small number of major flaws in CSS.