Not a member? Why not join us or log in? (No more hassle filling in comments, less obtrusive ads and asides.)

CSS3: what it means, and what it doesn’t

Posted by Phil Renaud on August 20th, 2006.

Phil Renaud is a Canadian blog design and web design enthusiast, with a particular admiration for web standards and CSS innovation. Ruby on Rails, xhtml/css, ajax, and a whole lotta love.

http://philrenaud.com

Phil Renaud has posted 21 articles.

RSS Feed for fadtastic.net RSS Feed for Phil Renaud

Full Profile →

Just in case you missed it: The CSS3 preview.

What with standardists ruling the web trends scene right now, the emergence of a new specification template for CSS is bound to be a major point of consideration in future endeavors. It is not, however, going to be remembered as the be-all and end-all of web design in the current web culture.

But, why not?

We’re getting trickier as designers and developers. Sure, now we’re offered fading and new colour options and borders and easier dropshadows, but aren’t these things we’ve already been able to do as it stands with a little graphical manipulation, possibly some client-side goodness, and it all still came out as standards compliant?

The long and the short of it: this will help designers ease their workload, but ultimately will not change the face of the web, especially in light of the web2.0 trends that are so prevalent and deadset in their ways as they are. The likelihood that Internet Explorer’s next incarnation will support png alpha fades to the extent that standardists were hoping are looking fairly slim, and the rest of the listed provisions for CSS3 don’t look like mainstays for IE7 either.

And it’s not like the text-shadow function won’t be used by every myspace hipster at any given juncture. All indications point to that becoming as useful and user-friendly as the blink effect once was.

Maybe I’m just being bitter, though. Maybe I’m simply upset that, even though my April Fools’ specifications were far superior, they were largely ignored by the W3C. I’m sure this will usher in many non-standardists eager to learn some CSS tricks, but is that really the test market that the W3C is aiming for?

My contention is that there needs to be firstly, a more active agreement between popular browsers and the W3C to bring functionality together with potential, and secondly, a stronger push for community involvement and a better learning environment for the new specifications.

But that’s me - what do you think? What is css3 missing, and what does it concentrate too hard on?

Make A Comment

( 9 so far )

blockquote and a tags work here.

9 Responses to CSS3: what it means, and what it doesn’t

Comments RSS Feed

Who knows CSS3, I bet not that much webdesigners.

CSS2.x is used in most cases to build pro websites and the like. Some browsers like Opera and other swifty updated browsers implement some of them CSS3 gems.

Some reading:

css3 selectors explained

Johan
August 20th, 2006
#

I’d guess that CSS3 would simply remove some of the ‘donkey work’ from web design (you know - making gradients or complicated border imagery) and let us save some precious time which we could use elsewhere in the design.

It won’t be the next big thing in my view - I agree with Phil on this one.

What I’d be interested in is how CSS3 handles columns. I’ve spent many an hour pondering over column structure within a document. If columns are built in then I could rejoice! ;)

Andrew Faulkner
August 20th, 2006
#

Additional links about CSS3

CSS3 columnar layouts seems interesting:

3 columnar layouts
box sizing

Johan
August 20th, 2006
#

I am repeating myself or cloning?

The CSS3 interesting parts are not web standardized CSS gems that are not working cross-browser. So it depends really for what browsers you are coding for and know what you are doing.
Dean Edwards has a JS function named cssQuery which allows to add support for some CSS3 selectors.

Johan
August 20th, 2006
#

One thing we also need to take into account is that new browser penetration is going to determine how much we can actually use CSS3 to its full extent. Sure, we could make a CSS2 version of the site to go along with a CSS3 version, but I have not worked on a site project yet that has the deadline and budget to allow such luxuries.

I think CSS3 may make our lives easier a couple years from now, but I just don’t see it being used on a large scale until then.

P.J. Onori
August 20th, 2006
#

P.J,

My take on this would be to have a single rendering engine. The browsers would compete over the bells and whistles around the webpage. But that’s another article…

Andrew Faulkner
August 21st, 2006
#

Yeah, that would definitely be the best solution. Unfortunately, I think we’re far away from something like that happening.

P.J. Onori
August 22nd, 2006
#

I belive that the most useful changes to CSS is inside the CSS2.1 specification. With things like display: table and min/max-width/height we can do really effective stuff. CSS3 has some nice stuff in the Advanced layout module, could become interesting I think.

Emil Stenström
August 27th, 2006
#

[…] CSS3: what it means, and what it doesn’t […]

↑ Jump up to the comment form

Related In Some Way, Shape Or Form

The above post has obviously kept you amused. Why not discover similar material:

The posts W3C’s CSS spec updatesWhat happened to :: ?We have a friend! Presenting Design DeconstructHow Big Is Too Big?Accessibility - Let it be for all, are related to this post.

Or why not take time out to find out about the author of the post.