Talk:Web development/Web development (rewrite): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:40, 2 January 2007

Revision as of 04:03, 2 January 2007

Line 58:

'''Production''': We create the finished product;from final text and graphic content to software development and implementation. Guided by comprehensive processes of quality assurance and usability evaluation, we develop a product that delights users and meets or exceeds our established benchmarks. ''[http://www.diamondbullet.com/process.txl (C) Copyright 2002. Diamond Bullet Design, Inc.]''

====CSS versus tables====

''I moved this section here from the current article on Web design. It is currently unchanged.'' [[User:ChrisLoosley|Chris Loosley]] 04:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

{{seesubarticle|Web design (Tableless)}}

Back when [[Netscape Navigator]] 4 dominated the browser market, the popular (but now deprecated) solution available for designers to lay out a Web page was by using tables. Often even simple designs for a page would require dozens of tables nested in each other. Many [[web templates]] in [[Dreamweaver]] and other [[WYSIWYG]] editors still use this technique today. Navigator 4 didn't support [[Cascading Style Sheets|CSS]] to a useful degree, so it simply wasn't used.

After the [[browser wars]] were over, and [[Internet Explorer]] dominated the market, designers started turning towards CSS as an alternate, better means of laying out their pages. CSS proponents say that tables should only be used for tabular data, not for layout. Using CSS instead of tables also returns HTML to a [[semantic markup]], which helps [[bots]] and search engines understand what's going on in a web page. Today, all modern [[Web browser]]s now support CSS with different degrees of [[Comparison of layout engines (CSS)|limitations]].

However, one of the main points against CSS is that by relying on it exclusively, control is essentially relinquished as each browser has its own quirks which result in a slightly different page display. This is especially a problem as not every browser supports the same subset of CSS rules. For designers who are used to table-based layouts, developing Web sites in CSS often becomes a matter of trying to replicate what can be done with tables, leading some to find CSS design rather cumbersome due to lack of familiarity. For example, at one time it was rather difficult to produce certain design elements, such as vertical positioning, and full-length footers in a design using absolute positions. With the abundance of CSS resources available online today, though, designing with reasonable adherence to standards involves little more than applying CSS 2.1 or CSS 3 to properly structured markup.

These days most modern browsers have solved most of these quirks in CSS rendering and this has made many different CSS layouts possible. However, some people continue to use old browsers, and designers need to keep this in mind, and allow for graceful degrading of pages in older browsers. Most notable among these old browsers are Internet Explorer 5 and 5.5, which, according to some web designers, are becoming the new Netscape Navigator 4 — a block that holds the World Wide Web back from converting to CSS design.

====Static and dynamic page generation====