Notice that the errors are due to the social plugins we’re using (delicious, Facebook, etc). Not really an easy way around this. Otherwise, the code is clean!

> You obviously have not progressed in coding since the 90′s.
You are obviously still very wet behind the ears, you have either not bothered to read or not understood the comments I have made, had you done so you would understand my comments referred specifically to maintenance and backwards compatibility, which is still of key concern in large organizations, and modern CSS implementations fail in this regard and are not backwards compatible, nor strictly standards compliant, especially concerning older browsers (and not that old either).

You obviously have not progressed in coding since the 90′s. Modern technique is to have separation of code and style. This is what CSS does. A programmer can look at and work on the functionality of a website only, while a styler can look at and design a website separate of the code that runs it. Matt described the benefits of separating functionality from style in his article. Not only is there less code, it is organized in a way that makes sense.

Organization by separation has been taken a step further with the more modern MVC approach (Model, View, Controller) which classifies and separates many aspects that are part of every website today.

http://www.uarticles.info

Thanks!

The best way to build a website is to do it from scratch a few times just to get a grasp on how it’s done. Dreamweaver does the work for you, which isn’t really beneficial to someone interested in designing and building websites professionally. Once you’ve got that down, start working with a CMS (content management systems). Drupalis one that we use for our clients. Good luck!

Thanks for the comment. I agree with some of the things that you’ve said here. Regarding “web standards”: yes, there was a time when there did not seem to be much standardization between browsers (mostly IE), but that time has come and gone for the most part. With the market share for IE6/7 significantly dropping over the past few years and all current and new browsers (even IE) moving towards standardization, this is much less of a problem now. Many of the popular web applications that we use to operate CHROMATIC have moved away from supporting older versions of IE simply because the market share is no longer there and hence it’s a waste of time and resources. We charge extra for IE6/7 optimization.

The argument for table-based layouts taking longer to load is valid in my opinion based on research I did prior to writing this article. That being said, there certainly are cases when using a table is superior to using divs (i.e. displaying tabular data). If you’re building an Intranet-based website for a company that primarily uses outdated IE browsers, then working with a table-based layout makes sense.

Yes, CSS does take time to learn, but that’s not a valid excuse for not using it. If you’re a newbie web designer or someone just looking to quickly put together a site, then a table-based layout may be the best option. But if you’re a professional designer, then (in my opinion) there is no excuse for not taking the time to learn how to use CSS. Yes, it will take more time to learn, but it is your duty as a professional web designer to give your client the most cutting-edge coding methods available. The good news for designers just getting started is that there has never been a better (and easier) time to do so since all major browsers are now on the same page with regards to standardization. IE debugging is, for the most part, a thing of the past.

I certainly can relate to where you’re coming from when you speak of the “other side of the coin”. We’ve been there, too.

I have been qualified as a designer since 96 and programming both front-end and back-end code since 98, I have experience with every browser since IE2, and the original Netspace Navigator, so can respectfully disagree with some of what you have written, particularly with reference to the use of tables. Using HTML 4, HTML 5 and the CSS standards is a project dependant choice… it always will be since not all web sites serve the same purpose.

The size of the project, the content and the target market, as well as the targeted runtime is more important to consider than simply dismissing some older yet still valid techniques. So many new web designers and developers I train start off with your echoed sentiment, but its wrong. In-fact using tables / HTML 4 tags correctly can be more valid given the right circumstances, and can also actually provide more consistent browser compatible markup.

My advice to all newbies is learn to code rather than generate markup, you will benefit greatly in the long run. Tables will certainly NOT be a performance hit, that’s rubbish, unless you generate them, and especially with a poor tool like word, hence producing less than optimal markup.

CSS on the other hand may be the best tool we have right now, but its not without its own set of problems… CSS could be considered a failed standard (it is hardly standard with little consistency btw browsers)… how is that a standard?

This is the definition of a web standard:
“Web standards help ensure that web sites are accessible on a wide variety of platforms and to a wide range of users including users with disabilities.”

‘Modern web designers’ like CSS because you have access to newer browser features, and this allows you to create more ‘attractive’ pages easier, but usually by ignoring older browsers or writing scores of hacks and swap-outs. Only when the testing starts do you discover the mess and then all the patchwork begins (a maintenance nightmare in massive sites). CSS inheritance is also badly designed so it takes a lot of experience to create lean and efficient style sheets, and knowing also where exactly to put them too. CSS may be easy to learn yes, but truly mastering it is another matter since there are so many ways you can do things and only when you have maintained hundreds of style sheets can you understand this.

Anybody who has ever done some performance testing will also tell you page rendering time tends to be the biggest bottleneck in front-end code, and bloated style sheets share a lot of the blame here, in-fact they are far worse to handle than a few extra tables as opposed to divs.

Not slamming you Matt, you do have some valid points, but you also need to consider the other side of the coin… My clients are mostly financial institutions with lots of cash, but some of them have to deal with a lot of corporate red tape and don’t upgrade often… I have a client running a custom IE5 browser and almost 60% running IE6 as crazy as that sounds. A huge portion also use weird resolutions such as portable palm devices and BlackBerry’s, so fluid designs are very important to me, and some of the more modern CSS renders crap on these devices.

Just something to consider, its not all fixed in stone.
Peter

Great article, well thought out and very good guide. I think we are all guilty in taking short cuts.

Interesting subset maybe for web design projects, add the XML sitemap and then use search as googlebot from Google Wemaster tools. Appears to help speed up the process.

Thanks again.

Simon
Colchester, UK