JEFF: Any thoughts on what that means to Web developers interested in using
CSS as it exists today?
ERIC: Ouch. I hate this question, because I have to decide whether I want
to evangelize CSS, which is a technology I really like and think should be
used more widely, or whether I should acknowledge the reality that designers
need as much consistency as possible.
I guess my thoughts are if you're going to use CSS - and I really think
that designers should do so - then you're going to have to take the time to
do even more cross-browser testing than usual. It's a lot like the early
days of HTML, when various browsers rendered basic HTML tags very
differently. You had to remember that Web pages can't be controlled
absolutely, which is still as true today as it was then.
Assuming a proper design, the stylesheets shouldn't make a hug's
difference, which frees a designer to use them at will. Of course, that's
only true in content-oriented sites like encyclopedias, reference databases,
and certain online publications. Appearance-oriented sites, like corporate
servers, entertainment sites, and certain other online publications, generally rely too heavily on a certain look to be able to use CSS to any
advantage.
Hopefully, sites like the Reference Guide and the Test Suite will help
designers find style properties they can use. Trust me, there are seams in
the specification where you can find consistent effects across browsers and
platforms. Font properties, for example, are becoming more and more
supported. Just remember to use generic font families, because I
personally don't have Arial (or whatever the heck it's called) installed on
my Macintosh, any more than you Windows types have Chicago installed on your
machines.
next page»
