tedd wrote:
> Using anything /may/ cause problems -- it's the experience/skill of
> the user that makes the difference.
If by "user" you mean 'the visitor', then no particular experience/skill
should matter. The basics should just work, and the rest should not
prevent it from doing so.
If, OTOH, by "user" you mean 'the designer/coder', then you certainly
have a point.
>> CSS is a wonderful tool, but CSS shouldn't be used to "repair"
>> what's been "intentionally broken" for whatever reason. The same
>> with javascript and other design-tools, as they all will give
>> optimal results when the base - source-code - is optimized.
>
>
> Yeah, but that doesn't stop people from using a screwdriver to drive
> a nail.
How do they do that :-)
I prefer to use a sledgehammer - and big nails ;-)
> The point is that css _can_ be used in various ways to accomplish
> it's canonical purpose, which is to separate content from
> presentation. As with everything, repair/broke, good/bad,
> should/shouldn't -- they are all in the eye of the beholder -- I can
> only judge how it affects me.
Point taken. There are billions of weak and partially dysfunctional
pages/sites around, and new ones are created, as you describe, each day.
This seems to be the rule more than the exception, a fact that by some
is interpreted as: "anything goes".
This list: 'css-d' isn't particularly targeted at changing that, and I
personally couldn't care less how people go about their business of
using CSS - unless they ask me.
If someone do ask - as is the case here - then I'll completely reject
the thought of CSS-use, or /anything/ in web design, being solely in
"the eye of the beholder" - except maybe "taste".
Everything should meet or exceed a minimum set of technical requirements
in that it has to work and deliver content in a somewhat intelligent
way, without deliberately, or ignorance-based, excluding some visitors.
Web standards, and discussion-lists like this one, are here to help
meeting those technical requirements, and the fact that _all_ web design
related tools and standards can be _misused at will_, doesn't change
anything - regardless of what angle you, or anyone, look at web design from.
You _can_ to a large degree judge how /any/ web design decision/solution
will affect others. If you don't have the tools and means available at
your end to base such judgments on, then you just have to ask (at least
some of) the others, and build up a knowledge base of what does work and
what doesn't - where.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
