Posted by Mimic on 08/24/05 21:09

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> _____/ On Wednesday 24 August 2005 06:57, [Onideus] wrote : \_____
>
>
>>On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 06:23:43 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>><newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>_____/ On Wednesday 24 August 2005 00:19, [Mimic] wrote : \_____
>>>
>>>
>>>>A List Apart have just released their redesign.(like within the last 8
>>>>hours :P)
>>>>Given the amount of webdesign talk around here, I think alot of people
>>>>could do with looking at it.
>>>>
>>>>Looks GREAT, 100% valid code and xbrowser compatible. Take heed.
>>>>
>>>>www.alistapart.com
>>>
>>>There will be a few confused readers (including me) whose DNS server will
>>>point them to the old site. Here is the new site's IP address:
>>>
>>>http://69.93.55.164/
>>>
>>>Hope it contributes,
>>>
>>>Roy
>>>
>>>PS - I noticed many people who are amazed (in blogs, and
>>>alt.www.webmaster), but apart from the neat CSS tricks, it doesn't appeal
>>>to me visually. This comes to show what a huge rule taste plays.
>>
>>Yeah I don't get all the hype. It's like these people have been
>>closed up in a box where all they've ever seen has been text only
>>websites and now that they got one with a few ho hum, outdated CSS
>>parlor tricks they're all drooling all over themselves. Over in the
>>REAL web design communities we're all just cockin our heads to the
>>side and sayin, "Huh?". Especially regarding their 1024x768 non
>>text-liquid layout, how is THAT supposed to be "cutting edge"? Also I
>>highly doubt it's as cross browser compatible as people are claiming.
>>It seems like some screwballs are saying that just because it's W3C
>>compliant...usually meeting W3C specs means that it's NOT cross
>>browser compatible since no web browser on the planet ACTUALLY meets
>>the W3Cs imaginary standards.
>
>
> I played about with the site for a while, trying to figure out what the hype
> was all about. I have about 5 browsers on this machine, including some that
> are outdated. Konqueror seems to like most of it, but not all.
>
> When re-scaling the fonts, you can see that the site has a robust layout
> indeed. Some people got excited about the so-called 4 column layout, which
> I quite frankly believe doesn't take a genius to implement. Overall, it
> seems to me like an ordinary good Web site. The innovative part is probably
> the underlining on titles. Much of the rest of the tricks I already saw
> elsewhere... unless I am missing something.
>
> While I agree that W3-compliant pages are not guaranteed to be rendered
> properly by all (IE springs to mind), you at least know that the developer
> stuck to standards that were agreed upon rather than hacking or
> re-inventing the Web (e.g. IE-only).
>
> Roy
>

Yep, there is alot of standard coding and techniques, and thats the
whole point. The aim of Zeldman and crew, is to remove this incessent
need for creating complexities when designing websites, cutting out the
need for browser hacks by introducing standards that everyone can use.

--
Mimic

"The man who awaits the rising of the sun, cannot wait forever."
[email: ZGF0YWZsZXhAY2FubmFiaXNtYWlsLmNvbQ==]
Help Stop Spam - www.hidemyemail.net

[Back to original message]