61 lines
2.7 KiB
Plaintext
61 lines
2.7 KiB
Plaintext
From rssfeeds@jmason.org Fri Oct 4 11:01:52 2002
|
|
Return-Path: <rssfeeds@example.com>
|
|
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.example.com
|
|
Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1773516F1A
|
|
for <jm@localhost>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 11:01:25 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
|
|
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
|
|
for jm@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 04 Oct 2002 11:01:25 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from dogma.slashnull.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by
|
|
dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g94805K08772 for
|
|
<jm@jmason.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:00:05 +0100
|
|
Message-Id: <200210040800.g94805K08772@dogma.slashnull.org>
|
|
To: yyyy@example.com
|
|
From: diveintomark <rssfeeds@example.com>
|
|
Subject: CSS and mobile devices
|
|
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 08:00:05 -0000
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; encoding=utf-8
|
|
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-804.0 required=5.0
|
|
tests=AWL,T_NONSENSE_FROM_40_50
|
|
version=2.50-cvs
|
|
X-Spam-Level:
|
|
|
|
URL: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/10/03.html#css_and_mobile_devices
|
|
Date: 2002-10-03T14:52:57-05:00
|
|
|
|
So, d'ya remember that whole CSS debate that flared up about six months ago?
|
|
(Actually, it flares up continuously in various circles. In fact, I think it's
|
|
about time for it to flare up again in weblogging circles. These things are
|
|
inexorably cyclical. CSS-vs-tables is the hemorrhoid of the web design world.
|
|
But I digress.)
|
|
|
|
If you were around back then, you will no doubt recall that I was in the
|
|
pro-CSS camp[1].
|
|
|
|
So anyway, d'ya remember that argument that went something like “you
|
|
should design with web standards and CSS because it will future-proof your site
|
|
for the pie-in-the-sky future when people surf the web on mobile
|
|
devices”? Well, it's crap[2].
|
|
|
|
There are lots of good arguments for designing with web standards and CSS:
|
|
automatically print-friendly pages[3], dynamic style switchers[4], reduced
|
|
bandwidth[5], and aiding and abetting accessibility[6] (a topic which I claim
|
|
to know a lot about[7]), among others. But “because it'll future-proof
|
|
your site for the next generation of mobile devices” is not one of them.
|
|
The theory is solid, but apparently nobody told the makers of the mobile
|
|
devices (now that we have them) how it was all supposed to work in practice.
|
|
Oops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] http://diveintomark.org/archives/rooms/css/
|
|
[2] http://www.dashes.com/anil/index.php?archives/003378.php
|
|
[3] http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/02/01.html#print_me
|
|
[4] http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/02/13.html#css_fun_and_games
|
|
[5] http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/02/14.html#moral_arguments_aside
|
|
[6] http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/02/15.html#css_and_universal_design
|
|
[7] http://diveintoaccessibility.org/
|
|
|
|
|