On CSS redesigns, ISSN, semantics, and FIR revisited.
A note from Paul Hammond to those who would rebuild existing sites in CSS:
CSS can do so much more than tables ever could, and your work is showing none of this. In fact, it’s hinting at the opposite, that CSS doesn’t give us any new toys to play with and people can probably get away without learning it, as long as nobody looks at the source.
Requisite link time: Joe Clark dismisses the increasing rejection of weblog owners who apply for ISSNs. You may remember an article on mezzoblue a few months back relating my own problems in obtaining one for this site. First-hand experience on this matter suggests Joe is entirely correct in both his assertions and conclusions. (via Zeldman) §
Marking up a title. This is a simple book title, folks, it should be open-and-shut. That it’s not (and don’t get me wrong: it isn’t) suggests a big hole in general understanding of what is so semantic about semantic XHTML.
I’d argue that true semantics require rigid definitions, leaving little room for grey area. But then I realize I don’t know the first thing about the Semantic Web, and browsing through the source is far from enlightening: RDF is covered every which way, but I haven’t seen a single mention of XHTML.
Do we have an ‘Elements of Style’ for semantic XHTML yet? Will one exist? Does XHTML even matter in the context of a semantic web, or is RDF the ticket?
These are questions. I don’t know the answers. §
In bringing back online some of the still-missing content last night, I added this roundup of alternative FIR methods that came to light around the time I published my Digital Web article. I never publicized it, because it seems there really isn’t a perfect alternative yet. Phark is nice code-wise, but doesn’t work in IE5 and doesn’t solve the images off, CSS on problem. Levin/Gilder is code-heavy and rather ugly, but does solve the accessibility issues… though it introduces a new problem with transparent GIFs.
We haven’t cracked this one yet, but there has to be a perfect solution out there somewhere… §