What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
113 Comments
- 10goto10, on 10/10/2007, -10/+59< blink > Great article! < /blink >
- Remmiz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+39I hear Internal Server Error pages are a great use for CSS...
- aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -9/+42Any web designer who refuses to use CSS beyond basic styles and still using tables for layout is just damn lazy.
- ph3rny, on 10/10/2007, -3/+27Yeah use css to save bandwidth!!!
Oh wait... - phogasmic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22if you are a web designer and you are not using CSS, then you should be stripped of the title. I can't believe that this made the front page on digg, netscape or aol maybe but digg??? Come on now!
- SuperMoses, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17Awesome, was this article written in 2001?
- Legacy99, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16Site is down.....probably bottlenecked from uploading all the CSS doc's :P .
- Epixx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13In our next article, we will discuss how to "unleash" the power of your phone lines through a 56K connection.
- odetoparamore, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9If anyone still cares, here's the same article
http://webmasters.articlesarchive.net/why-you-should-convert-to-css.html - screwzluse, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Kudos on the site plug. Real subtle.
- tempusrob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8OK, but ESPN save *terabytes* of bandwidth switching from table-based to CSS-based layout. You do tell your "clients" that too, right?
- koick, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Actually, if you're lazy, it's much easier to use CSS than maintain old skool HTML code.
- nixon956, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9noob 1.6 is better
- arunforce, on 10/10/2007, -7/+15The main reason people don't use divs are they are hard to configure and setup unlike tables.
Firefox and IE don't render divs the same, and that can, and often is a bitch.
The reward is a way faster loading site, and easier to update the entire site. Google doesn't even use divs. - rkuchiki, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8The "Suspended Page" page wastes bandwidth by including CSS classes it doesn't even use.
- tonyt11, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Dude, is there really nothing new for geeks to talk about? This conversation was appropriate about 4 years ago...
- championchap, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I'm glad you can no longer edit this comment.
Hopefully your future employers will see this and think twice. - Coestar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Are you serious? I'd much rather have one external CSS document, even if it's huge, then having to sift through 150+ pages of a web application to change font tags, cellpaddings, etc.
- brianez21, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8CSS != CS:S
- zzz@tkz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7You do realize that CSS effects other things than < div>s, right? You can use CSS on your lazy-ass tables too.
- fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I think his point is, updating or maintaining a site involves significantly more than tweaking CSS rules. Particularly updating a site, CSS is largely irrelevant to that despite what csszengarden demonstrates.
I've *never* even heard of a situation where a new version of a site or application simply meant a new stylesheet. It always means new features, changing or removing old features and much, much more, and at some point going through existing pages whether manually or scripted, and applying changes.
The single benefit of css is abstracting presentation rules from the content and centralising them into a single file(s). - aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If you keep IE in mind when you are creating div's, it is not hard at all to cater for both. I always avoid using padding on divs, and just relying on margins with floating divs. That way you don't have to worry about IE box model problems. If you do that, the main "hacks" that need to made are catering for transparent PNG's.
- timisondigglol, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Thanks for this. Now I can show this to clients. I know a surprising amount of people that still prefer to use font tags and table tags inefficiently.
- etnu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Why in the ***** would you "make tables in CSS"?
The table tag is what you're supposed to be using to make tables. You can use CSS to style tables if you'd like (and most people do), but you should certainly still be using the table tag to represent tabular data. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a clueless twit. Misusing table tags for things that they're not intended for (such as multi column layouts and the like) is what people who know what they're talking about take issue with. - darkfate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5It was working before. Now it's redirecting to the suspended page.
- KyleMistry, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Ones done entirely in Flash.
CSS still kicks ass, though. - crushfan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6LOL, not using CSS. Nooblet.
- themoors, on 10/10/2007, -22/+26Hmm, I'm still not convinced
- SuperMoses, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4So CSS + HTML are for nerds but poor design techniques of using just HTML are for the cool ones?
- andrgo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I think it's funny when people's blogs can't handle Digg and then their account gets froze and we're back to square one.
- NoNamesLeft, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5thanks digg, i now look like an idiot due to your stupid ***** lagging comment system. Tried to edit first comment and it had 'vaporized'
yes, I have defended the new comment system vut this has convinced me, CHANGE IT NOW - tempusrob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Meh, the whole browser hacks thing is seriously overblown. Yeah, having to deal with IE sucks. I just launched a site ... worked great in FF, Safari, and Opera. IE7 required a couple tweaks, IE6 a couple dozen. Didn't take more than an hour to resolve. An hour I could have spent doing something else? Sure ... but in the grand scheme of things it's *not* that huge of a deal.
- Branden, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What exactly are you trying to prove with those validation links? You do realize validation has to do with how one codes and not which method is superior, right? Look at MSN, it validates both and uses CSS and divs. Does that make it better? http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msn.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0 and http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msn.com&warning=1&profile=css21&usermedium=all
- brianez21, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Generally, < FONT>'s SIZE attribute accept values up to 7. You might have meant "48pt", but that would mean you are using CSS. Sorry to burst your bubble ;-)
PS: Digg is really lame with those < and > symbols.... - championchap, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3If digg and "RL" aren't one and the same to you yet, then you aren't digging nearly enough!!
- chris9902, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3annnnnd.......... you're blocked. I wish real life was like digg,
- fLUx1337, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3oh cmon, people who dont use CSS now are using frontpage....
"is css a plugin for frontpage?" - antdude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Sure. http://72.14.209.104/search?hs=sUq&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.programimi.com%2F2007%2F08%2F18%2Fwhy-you-should-convert-to-css%2F&btnG=Search
- mapkinase, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Using CSS causing your account to be suspended!
- etnu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Do you even understand what the phrase "display divs correctly" even means?
IE (since at least 5, but probably much earlier) displays the "div" tag exactly as the spec says it should.
IE6 has several nasty bugs that competent web developers know about. IE7 has fixed most of those, but there are still a few. - broXc, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I hate 1.6 too. :(
- stockjones, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4CSS offers more "global" control and flexibility, but when you have to slap something together "fast" tables and old school html is easier and faster in some ways. CSS can be laborious jumping back and forth between testing layout and tweaking stylesheets.
- ozydingo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's true; but there's still value in being able to tweak css to change layout a bit, to do an updating short of a full site overhaul. And even when doing that, you can often keep some of the styles you've defined earlier if you're organized. But there's no denying that it's much easier to tweak a few characters in a stylesheet if you decide you want to add some room to the left of the main content of every page in your website.
- aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Easier to maintain, but table layouts can almost entirely be made in "design" view of Dreamweaver or (god forbid) Frontpage. CSS layouts mostly need to be hand coded to work properly.
- cVioletteRun, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3i think before CSS is really "universal", the most widely used browser on the net needs to be able to display divs and whatnot correctly. It's too bad we need to "dumb down" our websites, avoid using certain things, or use fancy hacks to make our sites match the lowest common denominator, IE.
- pxldev, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Digg in the past 6 months has turned into the biggest noob fest ever, some 15 year old discovers something 6 years old and posts it to digg, then a bunch of noobs digg it, whammo, front page noob news.
- crushfan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Okay, let's pass to the kissing phase.
(Hugh Grant, I know this is you! No one but you would choose a nickname like that) - srg13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2How many designers use Dreamweaver's design view though? Even though it doesn't add as much extra junk as Frontpage did, I still do all my sites in text editors (and did even back in the day when tables were popular)
- Yez70, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4This Account Has Been Suspended
Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible. - mUdd06, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Amen
-
Show 51 - 100 of 113 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is