Subscribe: Comments on: Semantic markup and CSS frameworks
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
agree  blueprint  css frameworks  css  framework blueprint  framework  frameworks  jeff  markup  semantic markup  semantic  site  time 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: Semantic markup and CSS frameworks

Comments on: Semantic markup and CSS frameworks

Web. Design. Web design.

Last Build Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 04:26:41 +0000


By: stuff: Extended Cascading Stylesheets - the beginning

Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:34:01 +0000

[...] 2.1.1 Zeitgeist At about the same time, CSS frameworks became all the rage, with all their pros and cons baggage. Online tools for making layouts based on this or that framework were came to life. New [...]

By: Elsewhere on the 'Net

Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:16:03 +0000

CSS - the antithesis of frameworks...

By: CSS Frameworks | Ploink!Brothers

Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:49:36 +0000

[...] ben het eens met Stephen van de The Haystack. Hij zegt: “Use CSS frameworks if you will, but really consider your reasons [...]

By: Stephen

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:52:19 +0000

Might be interesting to try, though ;-). At Cinnamon, we've been discussing the pros and cons of CSS frameworks vs. well-organized, flexible and reusable CSS libraries. There's no doubt that Blueprint has ignited a fascinating discussion. Thanks for your feedback, Jeff.

By: Jeff Croft

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:53:51 +0000

Unfortantley, I think a CSS framework like Blueprint and 100% semantic markup are mutually exclusive. I don't think it would be possible to achieve both. The very point of Blueprint is to establish some classes that can be reused from site-to-site. As you said, structure should be defined by content. Since the content of every site is different, the only way to get the strucure 100% correct if to create those class names specifically for every site.

By: Stephen

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:56:18 +0000

Jeff, I agree that we agree. ;-) Believe me, we also deal with hairy deadlines. My point is that what takes less time now, might cost more (time) in the future. I prefer to avoid this type of situation. Of course, in situations like yours, I understand and respect your approach. I do think that frameworks like Blueprint, because they are so versatile and useful, will be used outside of the one- or two-hour deadline realm. If you agree with me that semantic markup has practical applications (as opposed to semantic markup for it's own sake), then you might agree with me that it would be worth investigating the possibility of taking a framework like Blueprint and polishing it to include these best practices we've all been preaching for the past few years.

By: Jeff Croft

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:57:49 +0000

For the record, I don't think we disagree at all. I agree completely that the content, not the visual presention should dictate the structure and markup. I agree that using a framework like Blueprint, you eschew that principal in favor of simplicity and speed. However, I also know that there are real-world situations where time and resources are strained and the productivity boost this type of framework can provide is sometimes more valuable than 100% pure semantic goodness. When I work at the Journal-World, it was common for me to be expected to create complex grid-based layouts for a story or special section in a matter of an hour or two. These needed to work in many browsers, including IE6 and lower. It was simply unpractical for me to build these from scratch every time -- I just didn't have the time for it. By coming up with a set of classes that could be reused, I was able to achieve this kind of speed. So, we agree. span-4 and pull-3 aren't ideal classnames. But, in some situations, they're good enough, especially when they provide a massive increase in productivity.