What is Digg?25 Comments
- redhotkurt, on 03/04/2009, -1/+20>Very useful.thanks
>Great article. :)
>Thanks for posting this. Great article! Great ideas! Bravo!
WTF - inactive, on 03/04/2009, -0/+8...
- FredFredrickson, on 03/04/2009, -0/+6They're spam bots, I tell ya!
- lightningrod220, on 03/04/2009, -0/+6Dugg for sarcasm.
- WibWobble, on 03/04/2009, -1/+6Bury > 'Block User' > Save screen space > Reinvent how to list things > ??? > Profit.
- Digitalicious, on 03/04/2009, -0/+4Cubicledrone: "CSS doesn't work and that if you had used tables, which is a simple technology that fixes ALL layout problems in ALL browsers going back to Navigator"
That's um... Well that's not true. See, all tables are nested elements with different displays, floats, and paddings, and they're not all standard across all browsers. And they don't all respond to styling in the same way. Plus, that's not semantic. You'll throw off XML applications and search engines scanning your site for content thinking they're looking through a giant table of tabular statistics instead of your content.
There's a lot of limitations in tables too, and many of them stem from rowspan and colspan alignment problems; because of this, we see lots of web designers and IDEs write lots of code with empty table data cells, and spacer images increasing the page load time.
Luckily, there's CSS. It seperates display from the design in a really ingenius way. It takes all of those familiar HTML attributes (and then some), and turns them into a display language that we can reference from another document.
Cubicledrone: "Because they are and they do. I can put any HTML element anywhere on any page in any browser right now with a table. You can't do that with CSS, and you never could."
That also isn't true. CSS has very powerful floating and positioning features that just weren't available with HTML alone, and that allows us designers to create full featured user interfaces instead of just designing a "webpage". I can position things absolutely, relatively, and float things right, left, or center of anything else. If we use CSS, we remove positioning from HTML (something it was never designed for) As a result, we end up using HTML for what it was built for: marking up human language for computers. When we rid our HTML (XHTML Strict, of course) of display data, we create simple, semantic HTML that can be read easily by accessibility equipment like screen readers. Tables are for tabular data, not for layout.
You'll get better with CSS the more you practice with it. But I gaurentee that anything you create using tables, CSS will be able to duplicate using divider tags, and clean semantic HTML. And it will be every bit as cross platform. Putting icons in an HTML list is certainly no problem as well. - benologist, on 03/04/2009, -1/+5What a great article. I've never seen someone bother to take so many screenshots of the so few different ways icons are commonly used! And those tips like using icons relevant to your design - wow, just wow.
- hd11223, on 03/05/2009, -0/+3icons is important for designer
- Wavemancali, on 03/04/2009, -2/+4Beautiful examples throughout the articles illustrating the points they are making and keeping the article one single page even when it's a huge amount of content = +1 digg.
- strictnein, on 03/04/2009, -1/+3I agree with you, but I still found it useful.
- YvesKlein, on 03/04/2009, -1/+2I think everybody needs to take a big step back away from the internet and their computers for a while. It's killing our individual creativity. Look at all these sites, I mean, they all look like they were designed by the same person. This web 2.0 look is what HDR is to photography.
- chchrob, on 03/04/2009, -1/+2Something something on how to do something something design.
- benologist, on 03/04/2009, -0/+1Eureka!
- dross1260, on 03/04/2009, -1/+2HDR is to photography is what Thomas Kinkaide is to Painting.
- skatoolaki, on 03/06/2009, -0/+1Extremely well put; I was going to respond but you have said everything I wanted to & summed it up much better than I could, frankly. Thank you for sharing this sound argument on the obvious wins of CSS vs HTML+tables.
- JoshFester, on 03/04/2009, -0/+1CSS isn't so evil. You should try it out for a while.
- findhostcoupons, on 03/14/2009, -0/+1Helpful tips and interesting article! It was pleasure for me to read it from a very beginning till the end!
- danhauk, on 03/05/2009, -0/+1Make them yourself, then you won't need to find them.
- bbossert, on 03/05/2009, -1/+1The only problem with icons is that in every design there is at least one item that you can't find an icon for
- cubicledrone, on 03/04/2009, -1/+1"but how could you say that tables are better or solve anything."
Because they are and they do. I can put any HTML element anywhere on any page in any browser right now with a table. You can't do that with CSS, and you never could.
Sometimes you just need it to work. Today. More often than not, CSS works, but not until next week. That's the problem. - mebob, on 03/04/2009, -2/+1I certainly run in quite a bit of problems with CSS, but how could you say that tables are better or solve anything. I'd much rather learn to solve issues via css than do a complex layout with nested tables ever again. The real problem is standardization and cross browser support. I'm banging my head against the desk right now trying to resolve issues with a layout in IE but I'd still prefer this over tables. If anything, if you absolutely need to you can use tables and style them more precisely with CSS. If Microsoft would just switch to webkit or something it would make every web designer much more productive.
- cubicledrone, on 03/04/2009, -7/+1Looks great. Ever try to put icons next to items in a standard HTML list? Try it using CSS. When you're through screaming profanities, you'll realize that CSS doesn't work and that if you had used tables, which is a simple technology that fixes ALL layout problems in ALL browsers going back to Navigator, it would have worked in five minutes.
CSS is great for selecting fonts, and that's about it. Provided the user has good fonts installed. Which they don't. So your site looks like *****, and even if it doesn't, IE is always there to wipe its ass on the screen. Have a nice day. - cardcaptorstace, on 03/04/2009, -15/+4Great article. :)
- xCIone, on 04/15/2009, -16/+1Very useful.thanks
- inactive, on 03/04/2009, -19/+3Hey, this came across just in time.
I'm building a new site now and was completely lost for some ideas as to how to make a boring page for tv accessories more interesting....
Now I'm going to make a whole bunch of little TV icons... it can't hurt.
Hmmm... what else goes with TVs?
Problem is, not too many TV type icons... a TV is the obvious one... an aerial... a sofa...
oh-oh... any ideas?
Remote control... hard to recognize in an icon.
EDIT:
I've got it!
I can just put regular icons inside of a TV with rabbit ears shape...
Thanks for posting this. Great article! Great ideas! Bravo!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is