|
gorilla -> RE: Can this be done with CSS? (3/26/2004 8:57:49)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamseIsUnix
Ouch... I guess you aren't even waiting for any reply from me, but I'll try.
I'm always interested to get reasoned replies. Here's one back :-) :
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamseIsUnix
1. I had might as well said 1370.
2. 2. I wasn't talking about the style switcher or whatever tweaks they have but the styles separately.
3. If you have a browser that doesn't support CSS then the styles are just ignored. I suppose they can read HTML? Please correct this is I'm wrong.
- Well yes indeed saying 1370 b.c. or 1370 a.d. would have been just as inaccurate as saying 1960.
- You were quoting c1sissy asking a question so I replied to both of you.
- If a browser doesn't support css or (more likely) doesn't understand @import then yes. They should see plain unstyled content. You are however missing a key point that I was making. Some of those designs are inaccessible to anything because the authors have concentrated upon appearance and done some very strange things indeed to the rendering flow. This is completely legitimate in the context of a site to show those whose orientation is primarily towards graphics how it might be done.
To be useful CSS needs to taken seriously and understood by all those involved in authoring. I do not even remotely describe myself as a "designer" or "graphically oriented" I'm an activity analyst who is also a developer who codes sites (amongst other things.) The "design" is a tiny but important stage of that, as indeed is the coding, what is damned difficult (as you are about to find out with your upcoming project) is ensuring that all information is easy to find, and that even a plain unstyled site is acceptable to and accessible by all. You seem to think its easy. It isn't, the mathematical rule being used of 2cr makes it very difficult indeed once you get past about five possibilities.
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamseIsUnix
Really? REALLY? I was unaware of that, absolutely. [8|][8|][8|]
I'm tempted to say things "Like why on earth weren't you. How do you expect me or anyone else with even a small amount of knowledge about CSS to take what you say seriously?"
However you seem to be feeling a little bruised so I won't throw any hard unripe bananas at you today. Only soft squishy ones [:)].
Can you not see that getting some very basic facts wrong, such as saying that tables were introduced "decades" ago, or being utterly ignorant of them, such as what version of css deals with what, not only diminishes what you are trying to say, but makes the job of people like me who are pushing heavily for standards and spend a lot of time and money doing so infinitely harder. I do not particularly enjoy seeing my efforts hampered by a bunch of self regarding elitist fanatics, which is what many of those who bang on endlessly about CSS do. Just visit a few blogs to see what I mean.
I'm not talking here about the likes of Pixy, Big John, Papabaer, Eric Meyer, or the like. They after all are the people at the forefront and are engaged in research. I am talking about the hangers on who for some reason or another think that sneering at others makes them superior. I may in the deepest darkest recesses of my brain suspect that they are doing this sneering to soothe some feeling of lack within themselves but then that’s me.
I happen to have the old fashioned idea that people are entitled to know what is going on. The facts are a compelling enough argument. They don't need hyperbole or spin. Engaging in it merely makes it easier to have the whole thing dismissed.
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamseIsUnix
Of course the styles are inaccessible. But what I know (or "pretend to know", so you can beat me again) the HTML page content whatever you wanna call it, is.
For some of them it is not only the styles that are inaccessible but also the content. Because of the way the styling has been done. See above.
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamseIsUnix
I wouldn't try to access that page using my Lynx 2.8.3 (to view nice stylesheets [;)]), but I'm sure that a site with any of those styles is still accessible. I guess that CSSZenGarden is about that. If you don't like the styles, you can view plain HTML.
Neither would I but this is repetitive. See above. Nobody on the visitor side gives a damn about the code. They're interested in the content. I wouldn't visit that site using lynx or using jaws or a Braille reader either. Same reason although I hasten to add that many of the designs are indeed highly accessible.
Let us now turn to the basic issue as I see it and what I suspect is your basic grievance about my "jumping on you:"
The fact is that you made several posts in which you quite agressively jumped upon people for using one particular tool without explaining to them what the alternatives are, what benefits the use of those alternatives may bring and you repeatedly got your facts wrong. So wrong that in an examination context you'd be marked down severely. When I see someone do that I retain the right, I would go further and say the duty, to correct them lest the errors, misinterpretations, and hyperbole spread.
I am sorry if you found that unpleasant and nothing personal is intended – but I'd rather stop a problem (wrong info) at the outset and thereby help those newbies who come here looking for help.
Good luck with your project – sounds exciting. Feel free to email me for help or better yet to post here. You're probably better to post here because I'm currently putting in very long days and have a huge backlog of correspondence. Nevertheless I do eventually get around to answering.
In closing I note you've said in the other thread that I "jumped on you" in that you find table layouts somewhat clunky and high maintenance – I couldn't agree more. They are very high maintenance on top of all their other shortcomings. That is why I spend a fair amount time, when, to be quite frank, I'd rather be doing other things, showing people how to use them, and when and how not to use them.
I had a colleague - now alas deceased - who when asked "Who is CSS good for?" used to guffaw with laughter and give the same reply everytime "Lazy people like me."
|
|
|
|
