iroboto

4 ms·

1.
by 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 cont
2.
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&
3.
by iroboto 18y ago
>But you started that part of you message with > The HTML won't make any sense if you start reversing it >? I thought what I written was clear, but I guess it's coming off as vague. When you view an html page without presentati
4.
by iroboto 18y ago
>I didn't say that it's hard to read. I said that by the standards community's definition it is not good HTML, because it mixes content and presentation. I meant this by reading http://www.csszengarden.com/zengarden-sample.html not re
5.
by iroboto 18y ago
>At the cost of a lot of flexibility. Most people, when faced with a change in design like this, simply reorder their HTML. So perhaps "demand" was hyperbole, but CSS does still push developers to rewrite their HTML when design changes
6.
by iroboto 18y ago
CSS doesn't demand it to be done differently though. If the HTML is written with a different flow the CSS will need to be written to accompany that. I won't say it's perfect, but if you wrote div col 1 div col 2 and then you wanted col 2 t
7.
by iroboto 18y ago
The arguments presented seem like a half truth to me. 1 HTML multiple CSS not 1 CSS multiple HTML The whole concept should be that HTML should be written to have 100% accessibility across all readers (browsers and mobile devices), meaning s