WPDFD Issue #62 - May 01, 2003
Last month I demonstrated how I could convert the editorial page into a CSS-only layout and in doing so, used a variation of the usual WPDFD house-style. I had lots of comments, and thanks to all who took the trouble to write, but the consensus was pretty much half and half with no overwhelming preference one way or the other. Some asked why I was changing at all and others thought the new look was a positive step forward.
Anybody with a computer and a graphics program can produce Web graphics at the push of a button. Computers have made it easy to do things that trained graphic artists could have taken years to master – lettering, airbrushing, photo retouching and painting with a vast range of traditional and non-traditional techniques. In taking these shortcuts, many of the underlying principles behind graphic design have been bypassed and the results are not as potent as they could be.
Have you ever looked at a wall of television sets in a store, all tuned to the same channel and showing the same program? No doubt you will have noticed that each television shows the picture slightly differently and perhaps the idea crossed your mind, "I wonder which one is right?" Well, they can't all be right! Computer monitors are the same except you very rarely get a chance to see so many side by side and showing the same Web page.
As I mentioned in the introduction, older browser that don't understand CSS-P are on their way out but some people hang onto them like comfortable old shoes. As they were introduced when CSS was in its infancy, they know about some style features but not others. The rest of this site works just fine in Netscape 4.x because I've used tables for layout and the style sheet only provides the type specs.