New homepage design of d-p-l.org is now live. <eom>

Fri Dec 16 14:23:51 PST 2011

"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:dxjkyeeqrhsgsknfhexb at dfeed.kimsufi.thecybershadow.net...
>
> So <i>is cool</i>, but <body color=""> is probably bad.
>

Yea, I totally agree.

>> C. You may be operating with a workflow where the web designer is 
>> CSS-only, but that's not always the case, and I think reasonable argments 
>> can be made for doing it differently (point "A" above, for example).
>
> Yeah, that's why I do the hybrid thing, but when they tried to
> make the arguments to get more access to the html, I reject them
> and so far I think I'm right. (The designer hasn't actually needed
> to edit any of the html files I gave him access too!)

It's an interesting problem that's not too dissimilar to what game 
developers have wrestled with the last so many years: Programmable rendering 
piplines (pixel shaders) allow phenomenal control over how a surface 
looks...and that's clearly within the realm of "artist"...but it's actually 
done with code: the programmer's realm. Artist's can't code. Coder's can't 
draw. So who does it? And how? A combination artist/coder? Where do you find 
them? And if you do, how can hope to you afford them?

They've found ways to get by, and have gotten better at dealing with the 
issue, but it was never an easy problem and it's still not entirely solved.

The problem here is very similar. There are designers who come up with the 
"look", but their medium is code-based ((X)HTML and CSS), and it's tightly 
integrated with the full-on code of the programmer's realm. (Personally, I 
think the real solution here is abandon (X)HTML/CSS in favor of some unified 
thing that's actually *designed* to be a real presentation layer, and not a 
hacked up document format, and then create RAD-style editors based on it.)