CSS usage: will it grow or fizzle?

Just don't see it used that much.

[kiril]

Lately I've been constructing my first website (n.b. I'm doing this for fun as a volunteer, not job) and have been using CSS to do it, because it seems like the best choice for organization and simplicity. On the other hand, I'm finding it pretty quirky at times, mostly in my attempts to work around poor implementation in certain browsers.

One thing that especially worries me is that I just don't see many other sites on the web that are built with CSS. Also, recent versions of major browsers continue to have nonstandard interpretations of CSS.

Do you guys really think CSS will continue to grow in popularity and many more sites will convert? Is it realistic to expect the Browser companies (esp. Microsoft) to fully comply in upcoming browser versions with the standards defined for CSS? What will it take for CSS to really take off?

I'd hate to think I'm spending all this time on something that will fade out in popularity or continue indefinitely to be badly-implemented by lazy (or monopolistic) browser-makers.

[grahamstewart]

I think the popularity of this forum speaks for itself. CSS usage is growing and growing.

The modern versions of HTML (i.e. HTML4, XHTML) have deprecated all the stylistic tags (such as font, center etc) so in the future the only real option will be to use CSS.

This makes a lot of sense and it returns HTML to its intended purpose as a document markup language.

I just don't see many other sites on the web that are built with CSS

Actually I can't think of many sites that don't use a least a little CSS.

Browser support isn't really that bad. Microsoft is definitely the worst offender, but even that is perfectly usuable from IE5.5 onwards.

(hint: for maximum cross-browser compatability use a strict doctype with a full URL, such as HTML4.01 Strict)

[DrDoc]

That's the beauty of CSS - that you can't "see" it. A CSS based Web site doesn't have to look any different than a non-CSS Web site. However, once you look at the source code - you can definitely tell the difference!

Then again, CSS is easy to use, but difficult to master. I can understand if you think that it's quirky. But personally I think pure HTML is much quirkier.

CSS means freedom. It means speed. It means flexibility. And it sure improves future additions and changes.

Using CSS you can make your pages truly template based. HTML in itself has no flexibility, it has no freedom. And if you want to look a certain way, the code bloat is horrendous!

[skipfactor]

I'd hate to think I'm spending all this time on something that will fade out

You're not wasting a minute. That's great that you're using CSS on your first website. I wasted many, many hours not doing that.

As far as browser compatibility, I've found it helpful to download a major (FOXNews, etc.) compliant site's CSS sheet & study/test it. "File" & "Save As" using Internet Explorer will usually grab a site's CSS & .js externals & stuff them in a new local folder. Also a good way to learn new techniques when you're in a hurry.

[DrDoc]

"File" & "Save As" using Internet Explorer

...except that IE messes up the HTML code and style sheet. Any (to IE) unknown CSS selectors are replaced with UNKNOWN. And, it changes the actual HTML markup as well.

[jbinbpt]

Check out this great post from Nick_W.
[webmasterworld.com...]

You can start with only a few elements. I keep adding CSS elements as I get comfortable with them. Truly makes life easier. :)

[MonkeeSage]

Just FYI, Mozilla, Netscape and MozillaFirebird are all rendered in XUL, ruled by stylesheets, and driven by javascript. So at least one major group of browsers will continue to expand it's CSS compliance, of that there is no doubt. :)

Jordan