I haven't seen many problems with updating css files yet. As someone else
pointed out most browsers check whether it's been updated or not.
99% of the time it all works fine.
What's worrying though are developments such as server-side CSS. While it
can do some nice things it really defeats the
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 09:13 +0200, Marco van Hylckama Vlieg wrote:
What's worrying though are developments such as server-side CSS. While it
can do some nice things it really defeats the purpose of CSS.
Seeing as no-one else has said anything, I thought I'd complain on this
point. Even if you
I should have called the class 'importanttext' or something similar in my
example indeed. However it still holds. One can either manipulate the way
output looks by dynamically changing the CSS or by dynamically changing
the HTML output. I prefer the latter to be honest.
- Marco
On Mon, 19 Sep
On 9/19/05, Martin Heiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on Montag, 19. September 2005 at 11:01 you wrote: CSS or you can change the HTML output to
become span class=redsome_text/span and define .red in the CSS as well. Simplified example maybe but it explains things a little bit.But you mix structure
Marco van Hylckama Vlieg
One can either
manipulate the way
output looks by dynamically changing the CSS or by
dynamically changing
the HTML output. I prefer the latter to be honest.
But the question is: why do you prefer it? Just gut feeling,
or any valuable/measurable reason?
Also: of
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 05:59:02 -0400, Chris Blown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Martin's correct, class=red is putting presentation in the markup.
I disagree. span style=color:#f00;some_text/span is puttiing
presentation in the markup. class=red is still a class that can be
changes in the
Tom,
on Monday, September 19, 2005 at 14:57 you wrote:
Martin's correct, class=red is putting presentation in the markup.
I disagree. span style=color:#f00;some_text/span is puttiing
presentation in the markup. class=red is still a class that can be
changes in the sheet. In my mind, the
Tom Livingston
I disagree. span style=color:#f00;some_text/span is puttiing
presentation in the markup. class=red is still a class that can be
changes in the sheet. In my mind, the word red in this case
is just a word, not a color.
It's just a word, but it does have presentational
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 09:22:08 -0400, Martin Heiden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Technically yes, but you'll agree that it is confusing to call the
class red which gives the text a blue color, don't you? If you want to
change the color, you've got to change the class name and probably the
css too.
Hi Patrick,
FYI, Blogger does use templates which will update earlier posts as
well as current posts when you make a change to them. I'm not a
programmer, so I can't say how (thinking javascript), but I just made
a change to my navigation thoughout my site. Then I made it
separately to
Marilyn Langfeld
FYI, Blogger does use templates which will update earlier posts as
well as current posts when you make a change to them. I'm not a
programmer, so I can't say how (thinking javascript), but I
just made
a change to my navigation thoughout my site. Then I made it
Hi Patrick,
I know, but I thought Blogger then had to go through a (server-side)
process of rebuilding every single static version of the pages, which
on a large blog can take quite a while...or maybe I'm thinking of
Movable Type? Ah, whatever...you catch my drift, which is surprisingly
The other nice thing about Blogger is that many if not all of thetemplates are well designed. Mine was originally designed for Blogger
by Zeldman. I've modified it a lot, but the framework is his.Unfortunately, I added Haloscan trackback and comments, which make itfail validation. Otherwise it
I was thinking this morning that we constantly tell people two things
about CSS, as in this wonderful presentation:
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/ (pages 9 and 10)
we tell them
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded once!
and then we tell them
b) you
That might be an issue if you're changing the stylesheet all the time
(although even then browsers should still update the cached file if
it's changed) but generally people are talking about updating it
infrequently and irregularly. In that case it might take a while to
filter down to everyone's
G'day
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded
once!
b) you can reformat your whole site just by changing the CSS file!
and what, we just hope nobody notices that they contradict each other?
To me it's only a contradiction if you read once to mean once in your
Browser DO go back out and update files (according to the policy set by either a network admin or the user - which may mean NEVER).
BUT - the biggest problem is all the Proxy Servers inbetween the user and the site.
You cannot always gaurantee that the policy on the proxy is set correctly (or if
I wrote:
Changing the css filename is not a good idea as you would then need to
edit every html file to point to the updated file?
Unless like you (John) mentioned, one uses an include (I missed that bit).
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Changing the css filename is not a good idea as you would then need
to edit every html file to point to the updated file?
Well, that's the point of my trick, unwieldy though it is.
Every html file would have a server-side include, which contained a
client-side include. Next, a rabbit out of a
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 19 September 2005 11:17 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] The Big Lie about CSS
I was thinking this morning that we constantly tell people two things
about CSS, as in this wonderful
There is a simply option:
1. add a link to a generic css file:
link rel=stylesheet href=basic.css type=text/css media=screen,
print
2. inside this file, import any css file you need:
@import advanced.css;
The advantages are:
1. by using two media types in first link you will stop NN4 from
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of russ - maxdesign
Sent: Monday, 19 September 2005 12:08 PM
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: Re: [WSG] The Big Lie about CSS
There is a simply option:
1. add a link to a generic css file:
link rel=stylesheet href=basic.css type
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jake Badger
Sent: Monday, 19 September 2005 12:07 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] The Big Lie about CSS
Except that then that stylesheet gets cached (more likely
cached on the
proxy
John,
There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a
linked stylesheet
Intra-corporate controversy! Fair enough, but as Jake has pointed
out, this isn't absolutely guaranteed, because screen.css may still
get cached, leaving users with the old @import statements.
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 19 September 2005 12:39 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] The Big Lie about CSS
John,
There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a
linked stylesheet
Intra-corporate
Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded
once!
b) you can reformat your whole site just by changing the CSS file!
and what, we just hope nobody notices that they contradict each
other?
To me it's only a contradiction if you read once to
26 matches
Mail list logo
