forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: [RT] Getting rid of the table-based layout
Date Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:56:07 GMT

Robert Koberg wrote:
> Hi - my two cents:
> I like the iguancharlie layout. I think it degrades very nicely for Nav4.
> You could put a hidden div at the top stating something like:
> 'the Forrest proj supports standards initiatives. The page layout was designed
> in accordance with this. The browser you are using does not support CSS and
> therefore you are seeing a degraded version, but all the relevant content is
> available.'
> nice job iguanacharlie!


> The tableless layout is much easier to change into many different views. In
> fact, I think the whole concept of how you use the word 'skins' leads to
> confusion. You are saying the XSL is the skin when it is more like a skeleton or
> actually a bag of bones. The CSS is the skin. XSL=structure, CSS=style. By going
> tableless you get closer to the separation of concerns ideal where you can
> change the entire layout just by dropping in a new CSS - no regeneration and
> possibly solely in the hands of a designer (though I have yet to work with one
> who can actually use the power of CSS).

Skin is just more than appearance, it's also about functionality.
Skins in programs expose buttons that actually do stuff or can hide them 
for simplified stuff.

XSL gives you much more flexibility than CSS in this regard, and is the 
only solution for some skinning needs.

Apart from the fact that server side XSL is still needed for a generic 
cinversion system, I agree that we should in any way incourage and tout 
the use of the forrest skin with custom CSS personalizations.

Maybe it's a terminology issue, right?

Now it's
CSS= personalization

But you say:
CSS = skin
XSL = ?


Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message