Professional Web Applications Themes

Totally CSS? - Macromedia Dreamweaver

The site breaks when text is resized in the browser. That can be done on all Mac versions of IE, Mozilla browsers (PC and Mac) and IEPC if you set accessibility options. It's also not very challenging or create a fixed width design with or without CSS ;-) I would wait for something better to come along to represent the "cause". -- Al Sparber - PVII [url]http://www.projectseven.com[/url] Dreamweaver Extensions - DesignPacks - Tutorials - Books --------------------------------------------------------------------- The PVII Newsgroup | [url]news://forums.projectseven.com/pviiwebdev[/url] The CSS Newsgroup | [url]news://forums.projectseven.com/css[/url] ---------------------------------------------------------------------...

  1. #21

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    The site breaks when text is resized in the browser. That can be done on all
    Mac versions of IE, Mozilla browsers (PC and Mac) and IEPC if you set
    accessibility options.

    It's also not very challenging or create a fixed width design with or
    without CSS ;-)

    I would wait for something better to come along to represent the "cause".

    --
    Al Sparber - PVII
    [url]http://www.projectseven.com[/url]
    Dreamweaver Extensions - DesignPacks - Tutorials - Books
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    The PVII Newsgroup | [url]news://forums.projectseven.com/pviiwebdev[/url]
    The CSS Newsgroup | [url]news://forums.projectseven.com/css[/url]
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------


    Al Sparber- PVII Guest

  2. #22

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    Here are a few links for CSS reading.



    mojmiles
    [url]http://www.intellectualeye.com[/url]

    Referring URLs
    [url]http://www.nypl.org/styleguide/[/url]
    [url]http://www.nypl.org/styleguide/css/guidelines.html[/url]
    [url]http://www.w3schools.com/css/default.asp[/url]
    [url]http://www.digital-web.com/tutorials/tutorial_2002-06.shtml[/url]
    [url]http://www.mako4css.com/index.htm[/url]
    mojmiles Guest

  3. #23

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    >
    > I still think you've got the subject of CSS not quite clear yet in that a
    > site "designed totally CSS" does not preclude tables (which is what I
    > think you mean).

    No its not really what I mean. I have no problems with sites that are
    constructed CORRECTLY using either css-p divs or html tables or a
    combination of both. What annoyed me with this particular example is
    that it is a very very basic design fault, which would have been obvious
    from the conception to anyone with an ounce of web design knowledge. In
    its present form it will never in my opinion be a creditable example of
    how to build anything technically , using any method and certainly not
    worthy of any media attention.

    This following quote taken from the interview is quite frankly laughable
    given the fundamental lack of basic web construction knowledge they
    quite clearly display. They could have chosen to put it right but havent
    which indicates to me their concern for meeting standards is not as
    great as they would have us believe.

    "By embracing standards as we have done, and dropping support for those who
    choose not to support standards, we are free to produce pages with leaner
    code, better advertising opportunities, and an overall better user
    experience."

    > With that said, it is certainly possible to produce a
    > gorgeous site using very modern techniques, with or without tables.
    > How you
    > do it depends on what you want to achieve.

    Yes it is.
    >
    >
    > This kind of thinking gets newbies polarized and perhaps eggs css
    > authors on
    > to force themselves to attempt really cool designs just to prove that CSS
    > can be pretty. There is nothing to prove. I swear there isn't :-)
    I personally think sites totally designed using css-p have their
    limitations at present. That may be because of a number of factors,
    including lack of experience by the web designer. You can certainly
    design respectable, functional sites which are in use today. Im not
    convinced that it can achieve what I would personally require in terms
    of design issues but I am here to be converted.




    osgood Guest

  4. #24

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    osgood wrote:
    > I personally think sites totally designed using css-p have their
    > limitations at present. That may be because of a number of factors,
    > including lack of experience by the web designer. You can certainly
    > design respectable, functional sites which are in use today. Im not
    > convinced that it can achieve what I would personally require in terms
    > of design issues but I am here to be converted.
    The problem with css-p is: The only thing we really know about the
    visitor's viewport is that the top left corner is at (0,0). Everything
    else - available width, available length, resolution, etc etc- is
    unknown. That's why trying to "position" anything is bound to fail as
    soon as the visitor's system fails to comply with the developer's
    assumptions. The ESPN site is not the only one to suffer from this problem.


    Matthias

    Matthias Gutfeldt Guest

  5. #25

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    Well! After all this and after going to the library over the weekend to read about xHTML and CSS, I'm at a loss. I don't know where to begin.

    Sounds like the xHTML stuff is not worth worrying about yet. I mean, you can build sites constructed of 'Divisions' (div's)without declaring the DOCTYPE as xHTML and without worrying about the current browsers wigging out on you over the new standards.

    Which leads to my next issue. I'm not fully understanding what is the big deal of a structure comprised of 'div's'. I see that you can assign classes or id's to them and update sitewide, but I can do the same thing with assigning a class to a table.

    Also, if i built a page entirely of layers and without tables and font tags, and styled everything with CSS, isn't that sort of the same thing as saying you built it entirley by css.

    I'm just not seeing the whole picture here.


    shelton webforumsuser@macromedia.com Guest

  6. #26

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    I think it's interesting that shortly after I read this article, there was a
    mess of news articles that came out in a variety of Mac news sites that said
    the site (ESPN) is broken in Safari. So I went to check, and sure enough,
    it looks okay, but there aren't any scroll bars. Can't get to any of the
    content beneath the fold. Kinda interesting. Pretty funny after the guy
    in the article flatly stated:

    "Our backbone of browsers to test on during initial design stage was IE 5+
    (Mac and PC), Netscape 6+ (Mac and PC), and Mozilla 1+ (Mac and PC). After
    the newest version of Opera and the Apple Safari beta came out, we tested on
    these as well and no adjustments whatsoever were needed. The new site simply
    worked right out of the box. Chad Roberts-our other Associate Art Director,
    whom I co-wrote the front page with-and I didn't fully realize the
    significance of what we had accomplished until we saw a beta product
    (Safari) render our front page with the same pixel precision as the browsers
    we had already tested on. Standards purists always recommend that you don't
    design with pixel precision, but we have done just that... with no code
    forking, no alternate stylesheets, and no box model hacks. "

    But then again, maybe he tested it before v1.0 was released a week or two
    ago.

    Chris


    Chris In Madison Guest

  7. #27

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    In article <betiij$fhi$1forums.macromedia.com>,
    osgood <notavailablethisaddress.com> wrote:
    > Before they go shouting their mouths off about how good it is and before
    > other people, who shall remain namless, give it time and interview
    > space, they should damn well check it out more carefully.
    Oh, come on, you can name the other people. Go ahead, it won't hurt,
    honest.
    > As such the site, the people who
    > designed the site and anyone who credits the site as being a good
    > example of a site totally created by using css in my view carries no
    > credibility whatsoever.
    What's it like living in a binary world? I'm just curious.
    > Ive yet to see a good creatively designed site totally produced in css.
    > I keep asking for people to point me to one on this forum but without
    > any response.
    Does [url]http://www.csszengarden.com/[/url] qualify as "creatively designed" in
    your book?

    --
    Eric A. Meyer
    [url]http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/[/url]
    Eric A. Meyer Guest

  8. #28

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    "shelton" [email]webforumsusermacromedia.com[/email] wrote:
    > Well! After all this and after going to the library over the weekend
    > to read about xHTML and CSS, I'm at a loss. I don't know where to
    > begin.
    >
    > Sounds like the xHTML stuff is not worth worrying about yet. I mean,
    > you can build sites constructed of 'Divisions' (div's)without
    > declaring the DOCTYPE as xHTML and without worrying about the current
    > browsers wigging out on you over the new standards.
    >
    > Which leads to my next issue. I'm not fully understanding what is the
    > big deal of a structure comprised of 'div's'. I see that you can
    > assign classes or id's to them and update sitewide, but I can do the
    > same thing with assigning a class to a table.
    divs in general are supposedly less complex structures than tables,
    therfore the page will download faster and run smoother. Also I think,
    but cant be certain, that screen readers, for the disadvantaged, handle
    divs better than tables.
    Purist coders will prefer to use css-positioning for page design in most
    cases becasue tables were never meant for layout puposes in the first
    place. They where meant for data.
    >
    > Also, if i built a page entirely of layers and without tables and font
    > tags, and styled everything with CSS, isn't that sort of the same
    > thing as saying you built it entirley by css.
    Yes, it is if all of your division attributes are controlled via a style
    sheet. Flexible pages using css-p are far more challenging to build than
    static pages. Although the ESPN site fails even here because you should
    never use an absolutely positioned div containing text directly
    above/beneath another absolutely positioned div containing text.
    >
    >
    > I'm just not seeing the whole picture here.
    >
    >
    >
    The bottom line is build with what you feel comfortable with using but
    build it correctly. This thread got kinda side tracked because of a bad
    example.

    osgood Guest

  9. #29

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    j.e.b. wrote:
    > >>Ive yet to see a good creatively designed site totally produced in css.
    > >>I keep asking for people to point me to one on this forum but without
    > >>any response.
    >
    >
    > How about this one? [url]http://www.phish.com/[/url]
    Humm when it finally downloads it might have something going for it, but
    as yet I dont know what. It hard to distinguish the good bits from the
    bad. Its very flakey in Mozilla when you resize the screen. The
    background jumps around all over the place and the menus flicker. Its
    not what I would consider a good user friendly site.

    However it might be used in a css showcase for some of the techniques
    but as a commercial site I wouldnt say on it for long.

    Mac IE five told me there was a 2.5mb flash file to be download so I
    left quickly.

    I dont think its representative of a good site created with css, sorry.

    osgood Guest

  10. #30

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    As a novice who wanted to do things correctly from the start, I spent hours trying to get images to centre on my pages no matter what the screen resolution using CSS, expressing the image positions in terms of % distances from the top and the left of the page. I finally used one of my two free support queries as I could not centre images consistently across resolutions. The answer: I was told I needed to use tables. How can CSS replace tables if they cannot do something as basic as this? Or was I perhaps wrongly advised?...


    Shropshire PCT ALDD webforumsuser@macromedia.com Guest

  11. #31

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    >
    >
    >
    > Does [url]http://www.csszengarden.com/[/url] qualify as "creatively designed" in
    > your book?
    >
    Yes, some of those designs go a long way to convincing me that there is
    a place for 'total css' based design. However who uses it is not so
    clearcut. It entirely depends upon the statement which was evident in
    many of the layouts:

    'There is clearly a need for CSS to be taken seriously by graphic artists'.

    My question is: Will enough graphic artists feel it is necessary to
    undertake a steep learning curve to achieve what they want to achieve
    visually, if they can achieve it without the need to learn something
    which is not even supported comprehensively in a visual editor.

    DW plus other programmes made it possible for the graphic artist to
    design webpages. If these had not evolved into visual editors then
    coders would still be writing the majority of the pages on the worldwide
    web to this day.

    The problem faced now is that there is no software programme on the
    market which renders css-p correctly and accurately, which a graphic
    artist, such as myself, would feel was an important factor in wether to
    use the technology or not.

    The web is driven these days by visual content. Nobody really cares,
    apart from a minority of the people involved in web design whats
    underneath the surface.

    I suspect there are many like me who feel this way. Until such time as
    the software companies produce a visual css-p editor css-p will not be
    taken that seriously by the people who are at the forefront of visual
    presentation on the web.

    Without the influx of many more graphic designers fighting the corner
    for css-p then its an uphill struggle, being held back by software
    limitations. Unfortunately thats a fact.

    Maybe the next update of DW will put this right.

    osgood Guest

  12. #32

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    Dan Vendel *GOF* wrote:
    > Al Sparber- PVII wrote:
    >
    >> Osgood,
    >>
    >> I agree with you wholeheartedly about the ESPN site. I wasn't aware that
    >> anyone interviewed them and would be shocked if the interview were
    >> positive
    >> or congratulatory in nature.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > I think there might a "you-scratch-my-back-and I'll-scratch-yours" club
    > out there.
    Hold it right there. You don't have to agree with the ESPN interview (I
    don't agree with it either), but that doesn't entitle you to idle
    speculation. If you want to know about the background of the interview,
    ask the author by private e-mail.

    > If I don't remember completely wrong, even the new MM site
    > recently received an award...
    From devedge.netscape.com?


    Matthias

    Matthias Gutfeldt Guest

  13. #33

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    Osgood,

    What does the -p represent in css-p?

    Also, speaking of Div's or layers, in my experience, I have never been able to position a layer exactly where it is intended in various browsers, without anchoring it to some image. So, why all the buzz over using div's in your page structure over tables? To me, it just will not work. Unless, ofcourse, I am totally missing something.



    shelton webforumsuser@macromedia.com Guest

  14. #34

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    shelton:
    > What does the -p represent in css-p?
    p = positioning.

    Visit the PVII site. Those <div> tags all appear exactly where intended.
    [url]http://www.projectseven.com/[/url]

    Visit my recent sites -
    [url]http://www.reedtech.com[/url]
    [url]http://www.raphaelarchitects.com[/url]

    Those <div> tags all appear exactly where intended.
    > Unless, ofcourse, I am totally missing something.
    I suppose you are missing something.

    --
    Murray --- ICQ 71997575
    Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver MX
    (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
    ==================
    [url]news://forums.macromedia.com/macromedia.dreamweaver[/url] - THE BEST WAY TO GET
    ANSWERS
    ==================
    [url]http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com[/url] - Template Triage!
    [url]http://www.projectseven.com/go[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
    [url]http://www.DreamweaverFAQ.com[/url] - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
    [url]http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/[/url] - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
    ==================

    "shelton" <webforumsusermacromedia.com> wrote in message
    news:bf0s01$c1f$1forums.macromedia.com...
    > Osgood,
    >
    > What does the -p represent in css-p?
    >
    > Also, speaking of Div's or layers, in my experience, I have never been
    able to position a layer exactly where it is intended in various browsers,
    without anchoring it to some image. So, why all the buzz over using div's
    in your page structure over tables? To me, it just will not work. Unless,
    ofcourse, I am totally missing something.
    >
    >

    Murray *TMM* Guest

  15. #35

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    "shelton" [email]webforumsusermacromedia.com[/email] wrote:
    > Osgood,
    >
    > What does the -p represent in css-p?
    P is for positioning. Its just a phrase which has been used to described
    positioning elements by css.
    >
    >
    > Also, speaking of Div's or layers, in my experience, I have never been
    > able to position a layer exactly where it is intended in various
    > browsers, without anchoring it to some image.
    Well an absolutely positioned DW layer, which is really a <div> can be
    placed exactly where you want on a page. You give it co-ordinates which
    position it from the top left hand edge of the browser window. It will
    remain in this position no matter what.

    If you happen to have a combination of tables and layers on your page
    then the layers appear to move. You must remember it is not the layers
    that move it is the tables. Therfore if you want the layer positioned in
    relationship to an image inside a table/cell you would have to move the
    layer with some javascript. Snap Layers or Layout Designer 2 extentions,
    from PV11, do this very nicely.

    So, why all the buzz over using div's in your page structure over
    tables? To me, it just will not work.

    It does work, if you know what you are doing and there may be some
    advantages to using them. Faster loading pages, cleaner structural
    mark-up etc. Im not the one to ask really as I have my reservations
    about its use. Well not its use, who will use it when its not supported
    very well by major software programs. That doesnt mean its not any good
    it just means it struggles to get a foot hold because the majority of
    user are looking to use 'visual editors'. To my knowledge the programs
    on the market at the moment do not render css-p good enough to be taken
    seriously. That may change in the near future.


    Unless, ofcourse, I am totally missing something.

    I dont think you are necessarily missing the point, its just a
    difficult one to get ones head around.
    >
    >
    >
    osgood Guest

  16. #36

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    >The web is driven these days by visual content. Nobody really cares,
    apart from a minority of the people involved in web design whats
    underneath the surface.

    that maybe true for personal websites or more experimental stuff, but for
    business (those that pay the wages of web designers/developers/programmers)
    it is of the utmost importance, the web is driven by data, not visual
    content, the better that data can be organised, updated and delivered the
    cheaper and more efficient it becomes for business.
    >Will enough graphic artists feel it is necessary to
    undertake a steep learning curve to achieve what they want to achieve
    visually, if they can achieve it without the need to learn something
    which is not even supported comprehensively in a visual editor.

    yes - if they want a job over the next few years (see above).
    remember that a graphic designer is not always web developer (unless he's a
    graphic designer and a web developer), large websites are designed and
    developed by teams of specialists (ok. maybe not the guys who ed up
    espn) if a graphic designer doesn't want to keep up with new technology
    because it doesn't fit in with his/her work flow the development/programming
    will be given to someone who does.

    we are all learning here - even the gurus - the internet is evolving
    everyday. and we have to make compromises - especially when deadlines are
    involved.
    maybe the espn site is lacking in many respects, but the fact is if they are
    saving money and making the site easier to maintain then it must be a
    partial success, no?

    joe






    "osgood" <notavailablethisaddress.com> wrote in message
    news:bf0g0i$i6f$1forums.macromedia.com...
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Does [url]http://www.csszengarden.com/[/url] qualify as "creatively designed" in
    > > your book?
    > >
    > Yes, some of those designs go a long way to convincing me that there is
    > a place for 'total css' based design. However who uses it is not so
    > clearcut. It entirely depends upon the statement which was evident in
    > many of the layouts:
    >
    > 'There is clearly a need for CSS to be taken seriously by graphic
    artists'.
    >
    > My question is: Will enough graphic artists feel it is necessary to
    > undertake a steep learning curve to achieve what they want to achieve
    > visually, if they can achieve it without the need to learn something
    > which is not even supported comprehensively in a visual editor.
    >
    > DW plus other programmes made it possible for the graphic artist to
    > design webpages. If these had not evolved into visual editors then
    > coders would still be writing the majority of the pages on the worldwide
    > web to this day.
    >
    > The problem faced now is that there is no software programme on the
    > market which renders css-p correctly and accurately, which a graphic
    > artist, such as myself, would feel was an important factor in wether to
    > use the technology or not.
    >
    > The web is driven these days by visual content. Nobody really cares,
    > apart from a minority of the people involved in web design whats
    > underneath the surface.
    >
    > I suspect there are many like me who feel this way. Until such time as
    > the software companies produce a visual css-p editor css-p will not be
    > taken that seriously by the people who are at the forefront of visual
    > presentation on the web.
    >
    > Without the influx of many more graphic designers fighting the corner
    > for css-p then its an uphill struggle, being held back by software
    > limitations. Unfortunately thats a fact.
    >
    > Maybe the next update of DW will put this right.
    >

    Joe {RoastHorse} Guest

  17. #37

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    OhhhhhhK.... So I'm missing?

    Maybe i was missing the fact that by using CSS you can surround static Div's with other floating Div's that have rules about their positioning which forces the static div's into a confined area?


    shelton webforumsuser@macromedia.com Guest

  18. #38

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    Osgood

    That site, Phish.com was done by long-established web development called The Chopping Block whose clients include Adobe Systems, AOL Time Warner, Conde Nast, EMusic, Intel, Macromedia, Microsoft, Miramax Films, MoMA, National Geographic, Nickeldeon, Reader's Digest, Road Runner, Sony Pictures, Turner Classic Movies, Universal Motown Records, VRI, et al.

    Since you claim to be some kind of great 'graphic artist/web developer' you might want to send them a resume as they're looking for a senior graphic designer. I'm sure they'll snap you up in a New York minute given your knowledge on how the boar runs through the buckwheat.

    You're welcome.Humm when it finally downloads it might have something going for it, but
    as yet I dont know what. It hard to distinguish the good bits from the
    bad. Its very flakey in Mozilla when you resize the screen. The
    background jumps around all over the place and the menus flicker. Its
    not what I would consider a good user friendly site.

    However it might be used in a css showcase for some of the techniques
    but as a commercial site I wouldnt say on it for long.

    Mac IE five told me there was a 2.5mb flash file to be download so I
    left quickly.

    I dont think its representative of a good site created with css, sorry.


    Yachats_Guy webforumsuser@macromedia.com Guest

  19. #39

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    Osgood

    Why didn't you just say that up front?
    > Infact I dont design websites at all which makes it funnier because I seem to
    > know a good deal more than the people who do. No surprise there then.
    Lumper Dawgz Guest

  20. #40

    Default Re: Totally CSS?

    In article <3F13D558.6000003_the_bottom_of_the_post.com>,
    Dan Vendel *GOF* <see_my_signature__the_bottom_of_the_post.com>
    wrote:
    > I think there might a "you-scratch-my-back-and I'll-scratch-yours" club
    > out there. If I don't remember completely wrong, even the new MM site
    > recently received an award...
    So you're saying that any positive notice or exposure of any kind for
    a Web site you personally don't like is indication of collusion? Or did
    I misunderstand you?

    --
    Eric A. Meyer
    [url]http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/[/url]
    Eric A. Meyer Guest

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Totally frustrating
    By mdland55 in forum Macromedia Flash Player
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: June 16th, 11:11 AM
  2. Most likely a totally stupid question....
    By revengeofthesith in forum Macromedia Director 3D
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 28th, 03:49 PM
  3. my tab palette is totally blank!
    By Stephen_Darlington@adobeforums.com in forum Adobe Indesign Windows
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 12th, 04:33 PM
  4. Toolbox has totally disappeared
    By Jim McGettrick in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 31st, 02:24 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139