This is more a general question about how you use CSS than about a 
specific technique.

I make a habit of from time to time looking at the code in popular 
and/or cool-looking and/or horrible sites, to see what other people are 
doing or not doing and what seems to work. I also do this because I 
frequently am brought in to work on a project that someone else left, 
and I need to be able to figure out what they might have been thinking 
so I can unscramble it.

Recently I was looking under the hoods of a bunch of high-traffic sites
http://datagnostics.com/design/topsites.html
and I'm trying to figure out what's going on with them, and why they're 
not doing what I'd expect.

What I would expect if I were building a site logically is:
a. a doctype
b. styles in .css sheets
c. linked in the header directly or by @import
d. no styling or formatting codes elsewhere

Only two of these big sites don't even have a doctype: Google and 
Amazon. In Google's case I'm guessing it's because they place the 
highest priority on fast-loading pages, and they don't want *anything* 
in there they don't have to. In Amazon's case I'm inclined to think it's 
because the code is an incredible kluge job, put together over a long 
period by many hands not all working in the same direction, and the 
thought of a doctype just makes the coding dept. laugh hollowly.

What surprises me is how many sites have style codes directly in the 
head, either instead of style sheets or in addition to one. Is there a 
good reason for this? Do you-all think the head styles are coming in via 
server side includes, and are SSIs faster than links or @import? Or are 
they using some sort of templating, so that the head styles are in 
before they even get to the server? All of these sites are, by 
definition, under much higher than normal server pressure.

And then there's something like MySpace, with linked style sheets in the 
head, *and* some styling directly in the head, *and* styles on 
individual page elements. Is there any way in which this is a good 
thing? or should I stick with my original impression, which is that it's 
about what I expect from MySpace.

I'm impressed that 3 of these sites pass the validator. I was expecting 
it of Wikipedia, but not of MSN or BBC -- it speaks, I think, to a high 
level of consistency and discipline in their coding depts.

Mary Ellen
Doctor Science, MA
datagnostics.com 

______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Reply via email to