Disclosure: This is a paid review. Saying that, all our reviews are honest. It wouldn’t be fair otherwise.

What is it?

XHTML/CSS offer a service involving the coding of a submitted design. Essentially, Joe Bloggs would submit a psd/jpg/ai file to XHTML/CSS and they would code the design into XHTML and CSS with a three day turnaround. In their words:

How It Works

1. You send us the design that you want turned into XHTML/CSS.
2. Once payment is received we begin coding your design.
3. Within 3 days we send you your design as valid XHTML/CSS.

Who it is for?

The service is primarily aimed at designers; designers that have the talent to create ‘design mockups‘ but without the ability to transform those designs into XHTML/CSS. Maybe even designers that can code to some extent, but wish to have their design coded according to web standards, as is part of the service. The service is unlikely to appeal to other folks in the industry and may not be a wise decision for the average person that think they can design. The service is perfect for those with fantastic graphical skills but little/no knowledge of web design.

The Quality of Service

What would we look for from a company that codes other people’s designs? I’d personally look for the following two things:

• The similarity and attention to detail between the mockup and the final output. This is the cornerstone of services like XHTML/CSS. The customer expects this. That said, we know that coding in XHTML and CSS is not a pixel-perfect art. Attention to detail is key, but the odd pixel difference between browsers and platforms is expected.
• Quality code. Simple enough - but a three day turnaround adds extra pressure into the equation. Let’s see how the XHTML and CSS holds up.

It’s one thing describing the service, now let’s look under the surface at the portfolio.

1. Sales Manage Solutions Blog

View Screenshot

The first case study of two is the Sales Manage Solutions Blog. Comparing the screenshot that the designer submitted and the coded version from portfolio, we can see that it has reproduced faithfully. Graphically, the output is sound. Criticisms with the look (what little there are) would lie in three areas:

1. Shadows around some elements are a little harsh.
2. The logo seems to differ in type setting. (This may have been to the clients request. That’s what I assume.)
3. The typography seems to differ slightly between the original and the final design. I’m assuming again that this could have been at the client’s request.

So the front-end design has passed the test - let’s view-source and take a gander at the code.

• XHTML: Technically (ignoring character compatibility), the document passes validation tests at XHTML Transitional. A good thing for any service in this market. It would be easy to rush and ignore standards to meet the tight deadline. Applause for XHTML/CSS. What puzzles me though is the fact that it validates to XHTML 1.0 Strict. Why not use that Doctype? A look through the source shows that it is in most cases semantic and efficient. There is a small case of divitis but this may be expected when coding other people’s designs.
• CSS: Most of the CSS seems to be efficient. It may not be perfect but it is clean and understandable for the end user. I’d have no problem editing it. Often, short hand is used where it can be so that’s a plus. There is one validation error, but this is due to the png fix for IE. I’ll let that slide. (I tend to be of the opinion that XHTML should be perfect but CSS can be invalid if there’s good reason and it is tested.)

So, on the whole, I’d be very pleased if I were the client. Next case study…

2. Music Snob

View Screenshot

The second case study is Music Snob. Comparing the screenshot that the designer submitted and the coded version from portfolio, we can see that it has also been reproduced faithfully. Points of criticism include:

1. The spacing on the main header (H1) seems to have changed. For the better though in my view.
2. The logo seems a little blurred as a result of optimising for the web, although a decent version may not have been supplied.

And the code?

• XHTML: Valid XHTML Transitional again. Thumbs up. But not valid at XHTML Strict. It wouldn’t be hard to get this valid to strict as the errors are trivial. (For the record, I know it’s not quoted as Strict XHTML on their site - just an observation.) The occasional superfluous div and br is present but this doesn’t let down the quality of the coding too much. It’s good, again.
• CSS: CSS is valid, efficient and easy understand. No criticisms here at all.

Conclusions

Looking through other designs in the portfolio, I can see that on most occasions the designs are reproduced in XHTML and CSS with accuracy. There are occasional differences but not enough to shout about. The changes may have also been requested by the client - I cannot be sure. The markup is fairly good - semantics, standards and general coding practices are followed where possible. It is not of the same high quality as the standards gurus out there - but not too far off. That said, for the cost and turnaround I don’t think that would be humanly possible. Without using this service, I could happily recommend it to someone with a low budget and some design skills.

To get the most out of this, a good design talent is needed to create the design in the first place. If you’re a designer without coding knowledge then this service (or a competitor’s - they happily list them on their site) could be for you. It’s also worth me pointing out that these types of services span two categories; the professional, code-loving type in this review and the slicing monkeys that don’t help anyone (read my comment to find the difference). If you’re a designer looking for this type of service then ask someone to look over code samples - it’s worth it. It’s also better than buying a template from Templates R Us. It’s the difference between buying mass produced cheap food and the organic stuff. Don’t expect the moon on a stick, but do expect good code and a site that looks almost identical to your design. I’m sure XHTML/CSS will provide it.

Share This

↑ Jump up to the comment form

The posts Get Reviewed at fadtastic, ReviewMe Launched, Review of urbanfonts.com, Call For TrendWatch Feedback/Beta Testers, TrendWatch Test, are related to this post.

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