[UPHPU] More CSS frustration

[Mac Newbold]

Today at 1:25pm, John David Anderson said:

>> The idea with CSS is to keep your markup semantic, and move the
>> presentation layer off the the HTML. If you're using tables to make
>> things pretty, you might as well <em> to make things italic, and
>> <strong> to bold things. Part of the reason CSS is taking hold is
>> because it represents a philosophy of separating content, markup, and
>> presentation.
>> 
>> I fail to see how a smart combination of CSS and table layout cannot meet 
>> these goals to a respectable degree.
>
> If you're using tables to format the presentation of information that 
> isn't... a table, then your markup is no longer semantic–and that's one of my 
> main goals when building the front end.

I understand that you value the semantics. The next person who has to work 
in your code (if any) will probably value that too. But does it make any 
difference to anyone else? I've get to meet a user who complained to me 
that my site was semantically incorrect. Yet when a site doesn't function 
as expected or appear as expected, I hear about it. I'm not saying that 
the end justifies the means in any way, but others might not value the 
time you're putting into the semantics as much as you do. In particular, 
if someone else is paying the bill for your extra work on the semantics, 
it would be important to know if _they_ value it or not. They may value it 
based on your recommendation, to the point they're willing to pay for it. 
They may not realize the extra costs it adds, and might be frustrated if 
they knew you were capable of doing it quicker with a similar result, but 
didn't offer that option to them. Who knows. But what I value isn't the 
same exactly as what you value. The person paying for it (in whatever way) 
is the one whose values generally should be used when determining what 
something is worth. If you're donating your time, you're the one paying 
for it, so you get to choose. If not, then your choice might not be on the 
top of the list - which means you could choose to do it their way, in 
exchange for what they'll negotiate with you, or you could choose not to 
do it if you don't want to do it that way.

> If you're using table-layout, what's wrong with emphasis-bolding, 
> blockquote-indentation, or using radio buttons for decorations? You can use 
> tags to achieve a certain effect, but you lose meaning in the content when 
> you mark it up in a way contrary to the purpose of the markup language. 
> Markup is about meaning, and using tables to hold sidebars and entire sites 
> makes the markup meaningless.

You've gone a long way down a really slippery slope there, and not all of 
those things are equal "offenses" in my eyes. Markup is about meaning, 
yes, but what is the purpose of that meaning? The meaning is there so that 
a client on the other end can render that meaning in a way that conveys 
the desired message to the person viewing it. The looks of it convey a 
message. The speed of it conveys a message. The robustnuss of it conveys a 
message. I want to do whatever best gets my whole message across. Most of 
the time the html/css I use isn't itself part of the message, it's just a 
tool that conveys the message (at least until people start reading my 
html/css and judging me on it). The markup can be meaningless for all I 
care, as long as it means enough to the browser they're using to get 
across the message I want to convey.

> I think that the reason CSS comes across as fanboism is because its a design 
> philosophy as well as a design implementation. Sure, its nice to have 
> centrally designed styles that cascade, but the whole idea stems from keeping 
> your markup semantic and separate from your presentational styles.

Someone can have a philosphy behind something when they create something, 
but don't be surprised if people start using what you created in ways you 
didn't intend, or if they find more value in it by using it contrary to 
your wishes. Don't be surprised either if people resort to shortcutting 
the philosophy side to deal with crippled implementations of your ideas.

I've thrown way more than my allotted $0.02 into this conversation 
already, but I'll let y'all keep the change and get off my soapbox now. 
Unless something else comes up that I can't resist the urge to reply to.

Mac

--
Mac Newbold		MNE - Mac Newbold Enterprises, LLC
mac at macnewbold.com	http://www.macnewbold.com/