Subject: Re: HTML & CSS
From: Kelly Williamson <webcrafts -at- EARTHLINK -dot- NET>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 19:08:02 -0500

>If it [CSS] isn't being implemented, why not? Because it's too easy to
>template docs in the HTML generator tools? Lack of support for CSS in HTML
>editors? People aren't willing to invest the time in the long-term benefits
>of CSS in a fast-changing environment? Has anyone considered CSS and opted
>not to implement?

I would say it's because of lack of support from the *browsers*. Most people
figure, why bother now, I'll wait another year or so until everyone's on IE
and NN 5.

From what I understand, IE4's support of CSS is decent, but not great. And
NN4's support is lesser than IE's. Furthermore, the few people I know that
have downloaded the IE5 beta have said it's still not even all there! And
yes, it "degrades gracefully", but people still don't want to see their
pages become plain-vanilla to those without CSS support.

But a lot of Web authors are actually using CSS now, especially for new
projects (albeit some with HTML character formatting thrown in as well).

>PS: I had to look it up, and Merriam Webster has "deprecate vt 1 a archaic
>to pray against (as an evil)"


Take care,
Kelly Williamson
kelly -at- williamson -dot- net
Image Online Services
Columbus, OH

From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=

Previous by Author: Re: HTML Help questions
Next by Author: 1999 WinWriter's conference in Seattle
Previous by Thread: Re: HTML & CSS
Next by Thread: DC Chapter Meeting of Ameican Society of Indexers

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads