jj: At 4:58 PM -0600 10/24/06, Css Discuss wrote: >I am a PHP programmer who used to do only front end stuff in the time before >managers accepted CSS as a valid way to mark up web pages.
Same here, but I'm a multilingual programmer. :-) >Now I'd really like to get up to speed on CSS but everytime I start to get >into it, it seems like, "oh to make that work in that browser I'll need this >work around, or it's going to do this or that". > >That sucks!!! Is there no logic here? There's logic, but it's not consistent across all browsers. You see, it has just been different programmers trying to solve the same problem from different perspectives and interest (the browser wars). Some got it right and some didn't -- IE being the worse offender and primarily because of self-interest -- IMO. >What do YOU (plural) do? I try to avoid differences and not use hacks. However, I also embed php inside css to make things work for me (but, not for the programmed-challenged). >Do you say, "I'm sticking ot standards, piss on your browser if it doesn't >look good!"? >Your clients will like that. If you tell them what they can/can't have and they accept those conditions, then they have no reason to be pissed. It's the same as any programming task, you can't do everything. If a client said he wanted his computer to fly just using php, I'm sure you would tell him it can't be done without wings and other wax, right? The web is no different, it has limitations. >Do you make your pages simple so that there's flexability in the design, so >that browsers don't notice the difference? >(Think Google) Simplicity is always the best for all solutions, right? Simplicity comes from understanding complexity. What we provide to our clients is supposed to be simple, which imposes a great deal of complexity on us. I've always said that the simpler my program is to the client, the more effort I put into it on my end. Simplicity has it's price. >Do you go bonkers (or spend a ton of time) learning the work arounds so that >instead of a specialist in CSS you become a specialist in the work arounds >that hopefully will be gone in a few years?!?! The "normal" evolution of a css programmer is to go bonkers until you learn enough to avoid problems by applying the right techniques to the right problems -- same as any other language. >I'd really like to get good with CSS, even REALLY good, I totally intrigued >by them, as much as programming. >It just feels hiking in deep mud,.. WAY too much work. I need to earn a >living here. Oh, you want to earn a living -- well that's different. Just go back to using tables, turn out crap for the windozes suits, and cash your checks. If they want an "accepted" css layout, then import a simple css defining a font. Besides, they won't know any better anyway. In the meantime, learn. Eventually, you'll convert over because it is actually easier to do css than to do it the old table based way. And in doing so, not only will you knock out better sites, but will do so with more functionality, shorter development time, less maintenance, and more accessibility for all. It's a win-win for all. The big problem here, as always, is convincing management that they thought of it first. hth's tedd -- ------- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- 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/
