- From: Spartanicus <spartanicus.3@ntlworld.ie>
- Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:18:53 +0100
- To: www-html@w3.org
Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk> wrote: >David Dorward wrote: > >> CSS Zen Garden is well known as an example of what not to do with >> markup. It has excessive, redundent divs and classes in order to make >> it as flexible as possible to change with style sheets. > >May I suggest a paraphrase of that paragraph ? > >CSS Zen Garden is felt by some to be an example of what not to do with >markup. In their opinion, it has excessive, redundant divs and classes >in order to make it as flexible as possible to change with style sheets. >Others disagree, arguing that the DIVs and classes can hardly be >redundant if they are required in order to accomplish the desired >flexibility : there is by no means universal agreement on this topic. Apologies for responding to this off topic spin off, but I can't resist. CSS ZenGarden has done and is continuing to do a disservice to the cause of demonstrating what CSS is about, and proper web authoring in general. It falsely suggests that CSS as currently implemented by the lowest common denominator (IE) is capable of fundamentally changing the layout and look of a site. To create this illusion it litters the markup with spurious code which makes the code inflexible and difficult to maintain. They themselves warn against emulating their methods for real world web authoring, but very few people notice that. CSS ZenGarden sets a bad example. Part of it's original goal was to demonstrate to graphic designers who for the most part ignored CSS that sites created with CSS needed not be bland, nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately the creators made a huge mistake in the way that they tried to demonstrate this, using a single HTML document with only the stylesheet being changed. The practice of inappropriate "image replacement" techniques that are so popular nowadays came about in no small part due to the bad example that is CSS ZenGarden. -- Spartanicus (email whitelist in use, non list-server mail will not be seen)
Received on Monday, 3 July 2006 14:17:27 UTC