![]() ![]() The reason for this is, mainly, that most companies use off-the-shelf software with limited modification possibilities for at least some of their stack, and often, changing their HTML output to fit a given stylesheet is much harder (or even impossible for some proprietary packages) than rewriting the CSS. In all honesty, though, I suspect that such a luxury position is extremely rare, and few companies actually recognize the value of a unified house style at the CSS level more often, practicality dictates that a designer makes the house style, and then independent sets of stylesheets are written for each application that needs to follow it. If you do this, the way to go is to first analyze what kind of page elements you are going to need, define classes for these, then write a some static test document that use them, write the stylesheets, and only then start writing the applications that use them. In that case, writing the CSS first, and then tweaking the HTML to work with it, may be a better way to go. as part of a house style), and you may even be in the luxury position to control the HTML output of each one. ![]() However, sometimes you have a bunch of independent web applications that share stylesheets (e.g. In most cases, the best way to go is to build semantically sound HTML, then add CSS for standards-compliant browsers, and then applying non-intrusive hacks and rules (e.g., IE's conditional comments, -vendor-something CSS rules, javascript compliance layers, etc.) to support nonstandard browsers and enable vendor-specific features. A lot depends on the type of website / web application you make, and the kind of context in which it is going to be used.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |