HTML vs. CSS

wschuah said:
Both are easy to used..
Click to expand...

Well yeah it can be easy to learn if you take the time to experiment and commit to learning it. It took me a little while to get used to remembering to close all tags for one, and then with the CSS you're adding a whole new system to a page which can destroy your coding if you don't do it right - but it can make it look that much better too if you do it right.
 
CSS complements the HTML - its also becoming the standard and are both meant to be used with each other.

CSS is much more flexible because you can pretty much control the entire page - you can define right down to the exact pixel where you want an item placed. CSS 3 has also been released for some time now and has even more cool features :)
 
Rob said:
CSS complements the HTML - its also becoming the standard and are both meant to be used with each other.

CSS is much more flexible because you can pretty much control the entire page - you can define right down to the exact pixel where you want an item placed. CSS 3 has also been released for some time now and has even more cool features :)
Click to expand...

That sounds like a much better way of putting it. Kind of like punctuation to sentences - well if you think of it, they both look better if they use each other. :shocked:

What kind of new features are in this CSS 3?
 
Hello Buddy

I m totally agree with u. I had read jst once it and i found it quite easy to remember. but you have to do it practically also.

Thanks
 
Making site in CSS is harder than that of in HTML as we need to check site in all internet browser. But one should go for CSS coding as google loves CSS based site :)
 
i think CSS is harder to do coding than the HTML processing, that is based my own observation in coding of CSS and HTML.



<MOD NOTE: Signatures must be setup in your profile and not manually added to posts.>
 
George_Olynsky said:
I think that html is the best too!!:agree:
Click to expand...

Show me a solely HTML site that outdoes XHTML/CSS in cross-browser compatibility, loading time, VALIDATION, and over all organization(clean markup) and I'll give you a VPS free for a month!

I spend most of my time working in CSS. A good developer does his/her best to separate functionality from design as much as they can. Think about it this way..

If I develop an entire website using XHTML/CSS and I want to completely change the design of the site a year later, it's very possible to change nothing but the CSS, keeping all the content/functionality intact if it's done right.

Plus IMO all the visual tags in your source just looks bad. But something everyone can benefit from: XHTML/CSS sites are generally better ranked and have far better results as far as SEO goes.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but anyone swearing by HTML and with no interest/use of CSS is either learning in the past, or ignorant. Either way their work will easily be outdone by any teenager who commits a few extra hours here and there to stay up to date.
 
HTML still has it's applications, but if you want maximum results in design, functionality, ease-to-upgrade and browser compatibility - and be search engine friendly, you NEED to use CSS. :)
 
hmmmm I've actually found:

CSS Layouts take a little longer to load:
because it has to load a single HUGE stylesheet, a javascript for workarounds and monitor resolution monitoring....because it's not truly and completely cross browser compatible

I'll give you that CSS is compatible with all browsers. However, not all CSS is compatible with all browsers, and you end up having to pack the CSS stylesheet with more css code to make it work, or include a large js javascript include to provide conditional workarounds.

Additionally, when resizing a css layout, you tend to get overlap of divs, etc. things don't line up the way they're supposed to.

Additionally you don't "NEED" css to be search engine friendly. You need proper use of content, code, and meta data, and link backs don't hurt either.

In my day job we used css to merely style the page. the rest is HTML, and when the new site launched on Oct 15th, we increased our readership from 5,550 per month, to 434,000/mo. Not too shabby for a non CSS layout eh?
 
Additionally you don't "NEED" css to be search engine friendly. You need proper use of content, code, and meta data, and link backs don't hurt either.
Click to expand...
Of course you don't NEED css to be search engine friendly. You do NEED proper use of content, code and meta data, plus revelant back links. An awful lot depends on the complexity of your site, it's functionality and purpose - as to rather HTML alone is the answer. More often than not, CSS/HTML is the better fit.

And congrats on the success of your non-css site, ANMark. :)
 
I find that a smart hybrid of the the languages and methods available...html, css, javascript, etc, are the best way to go.

We live in a brilliant world where limiting one another to one thing because it's "popular", is also limit one's creativity. Who know what someone will come up with by thinking outside the box?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top