Forum Moderators: open
Font tags - what's all that about?
When I hit ctrl + shift + s (ff) the only thing that changes is my custom insert code, LOL.
Isn't about time that WebmasterWorld began to entertain a few standards even to get rid of all those ugly fonties?
Guys like Tedster, Jatar, and many others have been preaching K.I.S.S. since day one. Accessibility is more important to use and code beautification.
The underlying advice is a best practices code we have strived to maintain:
- Be fast. Page generation time - page delivery time are golden rule one.
- Be accessible with your code. As wide spread as possible.
- Don't deny content by not realizing you are denying content.
- Do it within resources - both system and within monetary resources.
- Keep it simple so it is simple to maintain.
> like an HTML e-mail
Yes, your conversion rate goes up, while your open rate falls.
> it'll stand up to EVERY browser it gets thrown at
Absolutely. That alone is not a CSS issue. Right now, I still have to go back and clean up the PDA section of code to make it compat with the new V4. That would have to be done whether it is html 3.2 based or css based.
> this is more important than semantic code
Absolutely. On this site, in this environment, with this audience, there no question about it. I feel I know the crowd as well as anyone, and they are after those things I listed above. This crowd of page designers, coders, link monkeys, and other web pros have seen enough of the web with weird fonts, hard to read pages, spammed out sites, and over blown over-the-top junk in their day. The site is a reprieve from all that.
Strangely enough, I've been toying with the idea of a new skin/template that goes the other way in this regard. I have a template in mind that is 100% black-n-white (even the graphics and logos), and fonts for the entire page are on a drop down with two choices "big" and "small".
I should have guessed that you'd have more than toyed with the idea. I can see your point for most of your testament - but disagree with some of it too. Not knowing anything about the software doesn't really put me in a place to constructively criticise however it does seem odd that it uses deprecated tags to represent very basic markup
Isn't removing <center> & <font> tags seen by everyone 'in the trade' as good practice? A <p> can't be as bigger strain on system resources than <font size="1" face="Arial" color="#000000">, can it?
+ there is already some inline CSS in place already that could be capitalised upon.
Or is there something back end that makes it more difficult to render bodies of text as paragraphs?
I have a feeling I may be missing the point, that is: you don't actually mind the fact that WebmasterWorld is invalid - it is the most robust it can be - like an HTML e-mail - so your happy in the knowledge it'll stand up to EVERY browser it gets thrown at - if that is the case, and you are saying that this is more important than semantic code - it throws open much wider arguments...
The more I ponder this the more i find myself jumping off the fence I was happily perched on. I agree in almost every way with your statement and then I look at the title of some of the forums here: CSS, Accessibility, Site Graphics, HTML & Browsers...
This site goes against almost all of the advice given in all those forums on a daily basis.
Regardless of the system shouldn't WebmasterWorld (try) to practice what the community preeches?
Face it Brett you love CSS and want the whole forum to be a CSS showcase - but you can't be bothered... <ducks>
;)
Guys like Tedster, Jatar, and many others have been preaching K.I.S.S. since day one. Accessibility is more important than eye candy.
The underlying advice is a best practices code we have strived to maintain:
- Be fast. Page generation time - page delivery time are golden rule one.
- Be accessible with your code. As wide spread as possible.
- Don't deny content by not realizing you are denying content.
- Do it within resources - both system and within monetary resources.
- Keep it simple so it is simple to maintain.
> like an HTML e-mail
Yes, your conversion rate goes up, while your open rate falls.
> it'll stand up to EVERY browser it gets thrown at
Absolutely. That alone is not a CSS issue. Right now, I still have to go back and clean up the PDA section of code to make it compat with the new V4. That would have to be done whether it is html 3.2 based or css based.
> actually mind the fact that WebmasterWorld is invalid
I think you are referring to html validation? We are pretty close. I see I let a few errors slid in during the last up date - but I am pretty sure the homepage still validates and most of the site does. There are a few errors down in the embedded thread code that is next to impossible to fix (pres inside of codes...etc).
> this is more important than semantic code
Absolutely. On this site, in this environment, with this audience, there no question about it. I feel I know the crowd as well as anyone, and they are after those things I listed above. This crowd of page designers, coders, link monkeys, and other web pros have seen enough of the web with weird fonts, hard to read pages, spammed out sites, and over blown over-the-top junk in their day. The site is a reprieve from all that.
Strangely enough, I've been toying with the idea of a new skin/template that goes the other way in this regard. I have a template in mind that is 100% black-n-white (even the graphics and logos), and fonts for the entire page are on a drop down with two choices "big" and "small".
<added>
this page and the home page and the active list all validate...to html 4.
</added>
this page and the home page and the active list all validate...to html 4
Small request, can we have that nice invalid
<tr height="100">Actually, WebmasterWorld is probably one of the best in the field of large community-driven sites when it comes to validation. Whilst I much prefer CSS for styles, fonts etc., I can understand the complexity of the conversion process. I suppose that it could be done in baby steps, for example setting something like:
html {font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;}
.ve {font-family:Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;}in the header, removing all the
face="arial"class="ve"For the tables-based layout, no-one is doing CSS-P layouts for forums anyway - using tables is already the only logical solution.
