Talk:CSS/Archive 1

message: As per my comment above, I've finally decided to slice out a few chunks of the "Common pitfalls" section. Here's why:
* Paragraph "Another problem are unspecified, undocumented, and often forgotten class-names..." Many programmers choose inappropriate class names, do not document properly, and so on; this is wholly irrelevant to discussing CSS. Wikilinks to words like footer, footnote, explanation are just silly. Other issues mentioned in this para. are already covered elsewhere in the article.
* Paragraph "Complexity of HTML is another possible problem..." Again, programmers who choose to descend into spaghettification do so at their own peril; this has nothing to do with the merits, flaws, or common pitfalls of CSS. We don't need to list all the ways that a programmer might misuse CSS.
* Paragraph "Yet another pitfall is ... so-called CSS hacks..." This is already covered elsewhere. The necessity of hacks with certain software is a ubiquity in the programming world; refer to my comment above re: MSIE for elaboration on why I don't think it's of paramount importance to understanding CSS.
* Paragraph "Lastly there is a tendency of CSS designers to mistake the layout easily to be achieved with the layout a reader might prefer..." I have no idea what this paragraph is trying to get at. Good design isn't easy? Easy design is bad? I don't think a discussion of design sensibilities has much to do with understanding CSS either.
The two paragraphs that now remain may be questionable as well, but I think they belong for the following reasons:
* Paragraph "CSS may at times be misused..." emphasizes the broader fact that CSS has many features that may be overlooked by developers accustomed to HTML-only design, and I think more succinctly covers the issue of possible spaghetti code and maintenance issues better than any of the removed paragraphs did.
* Paragraph "CSS shares some pitfalls common with programming languages..." could be trimmed further, but I think it summarizes well the problem of class/variable naming.
Objections or comments? -- Wapcaplet 19:40, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trimming the pitfalls 

message: I restored the bit in the intro that CSS is a computer language. A computer language need not be a programming language. I think this makes for a better definition, since "style sheet mechanism" is broad, and does not tell us about what CSS is; CSS is primarily a language. -- Wapcaplet 17:20, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer language 

message: I am curious as to why there seems to be no section here or elsewhere in WP (that I've found anyway) of CSS development tools or editors.  Quite a few tools exist, and most would definitely fit better under such a list than under places like HTML Editor since they are CSS-centric, and may in fact not offer HTML editing.  Others like TopStyle offer both.  Thoughts?  If it is worth doing, should it go as a section here or as a separate page? --jwilkinson 23:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CSS Editors section/list? 

message: I've created a free online application that allows a user to format a CSS document by simply pasting their CSS into a textbox, selecting preferences, and clicking a button.
No password or download is required; the user may simply paste right into this webpage: http://www.lonniebest.com/FormatCSS
There are several purposes for a tool such as this, but one use is "CSS Decompression". For example, if a developer didn't have their personal tool kit handy, and wanted to evaluate a style sheet that looked like this  : http://stc.msn.com/br/ushp/css/1/IE7.cs
They could paste this style sheet into the tool, and conform the layout around their own whitespace preferences.
Though CSS formatting is ignored by browsers, it is a topic of interest to human beings who view and edit CSS by hand. Because this resource is for "human beings", and because the topic of formatting "Exists", an encyclopedic resource would be incomplete without mentioning the most common formatting preferences. Additionally,  it would be helpful to provide an external link to a versatile tool that prevents a great deal of manual work for those who want to make a style sheet cater to their own preferences.
This tool is free and available 24 hours a day 7 days a week. I believe it is a worthy candidate for the external link section.
Respectfully,
Lonnie Best 1/13/2006
* AGAINST - While I do believe that your intent is sincere and you are not trying to earn quick money on it, this tool is not worth mention simply because formatting modification is not vital. There are thousands of such "lukewarm interesting" CSS pages on the web, and including them in link section would be pure insanity. What goes into links section should be more along the lines of "indispensable". 70.79.41.244 07:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Proposal 1 

message: I read that if you wanted to be sure not to upset people by adding your external link you should ask first. That's what I'm doing. I'm written a beginners guide to CSS that has gotten a good response from my visitors and people I've shown it to. It's aimed at complete beginners and therefor skips everything that isn't essential. Is it ok if I add it? --Emil Stenström 19:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External beginners guide? 

message: Please consider this CSS tutorial:
http://www.html.net/tutorials/css/introduction.asp
It will get you started with CSS in just a few minutes. It is easy to understand and will teach you all the sophisticated techniques.
Regards,
Andreas Astrup, HTML.net
I'll take the liberty to add the tutorial to the list. I very much hope the tutorial will stay. But will look forward to all comments.
Regards, Andreas Astrup, HTML.net --194.255.144.229 08:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New CSS Tutorial 

message: I've been compiling all the information I can find on (the very limited) support for aural CSS properties on my site. Anyone think it would be a useful addition? --Dotjay 13:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Suggestion: Aural CSS 

message: I found an excellent CSS reference. It has every thinkable CSS attribute explained and is still very easy to navigate (via the keyboard arrows). What do you think, should we include this in the external links section?--85.180.23.229 00:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to CSS Reference 

message: CSS3.info is a very versatile website about CSS3:
* it tells about the status of CSS3
* it gives examples of the new properties and selectors
* it allows you to test your browser to see which CSS3 selecters it supports
* it links to articles and interviews related to CSS3. all of these are sorted in categories.
The website has a very clear layout and is written in very easy to understand wordings.
I think this link would be a great addition to the external links on the Cascading Style Sheets page.
Spellcoder 08:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to CSS3.info