XHTML: Not just for geeks anymore
XHTML: Not just for geeks anymore
XHTML: Not just for geeks anymore
10 Oct 2003 — 4 Comments
Okay, before I go any further, I need to clarify the headline above by acknowleging the blinding fact that I, too, must cast my own lot into the proverbial soup of geekdom. Anyone who spends as much time as I do in front of twisted mess of cables, drives, and processors is a geek. But that's okay. Acknowlegement of that fact allows the healing process to begin.
But some of you are not uber-geeks. You know, those guys who rattle off words like SOAP, PERL, SQL, and other various acronyms that speak of technical terror to a guy like me. I have an immense amount of respect and admiration for those guys. Their talents and contributions to the web are invaluable.
But like many of you, I am a designer by trade. I don't know a whole lot about scripting lanquages or how to create a backend database. And until recently, I wouldn't wade into the waters of web design without a visual editor like Dreamweaver or GoLive holding my hand. Many years ago I bought into the philosophy that I'm a designer, not a coder, and I'm not going to spend my time trying to learn HTML―simply because I didn't feel it was necessary with the slew of visual editors out there. Why bother?
Somewhere along the line though, a couple years back, I came across The Art and Science of Web Design by Jeffrey Veen. This is an excellent book, and unlike most web-related publications, this one has maintained its relevancy over the last few years. The appropriate title leads to a discussion about the two primary componants of a web page: content and design.
It challenged me to begin looking at the design of my web page and the content of my web page as two separate entities. I began to break down the elements of my web pages into logical categories.
Header, paragraph, list, link.
Sadly, I was still leaning on the crutch of the Dreamweaver and Fireworks combo-platter. Now I'm not dissin' Dreamweaver or Fireworks. They can be useful tools. But they'll also keep you from growing if you rely on them too much. The logical structure of content I was trying to create was being knocked over by the overworked, table-based code that Dreamweaver and Fireworks were kicking out. No wonder I was so freaked out about coding by hand. Switching from "layout" to "code" view in Dreamweaver was enough to make me run for the border.
I knew there has to be an easier way. Further exploration led me to Taking Your Talent to the Web by Zeldman. This then led to my introduction to the world of XHTML and CSS. Although the differences between XHTML and plain-vanilla HTML are minimal, it was the emphasis on separation of content (XHTML) and design (CSS) that sold me. This must have been what Veen was talking about!
I won't pretend that I learned to mark up my sites by hand overnight. And I certainly won't tell you that I'm some expert on this. A couple days ago I noticed Yellowlane wasn't validating as XHTML anymore. A simple check revealed that I had forgotten to close some meta tags. I have a lot to learn. Remember, I have a traditional print design background. Just like many of you.
There are countless benefits to coding your sites with structural XHTML and CSS. There are many great resources to help you on your way. Designing With Web Standards is an excellent place to start.
For Macromedia's part, they have added better support for XHTML and CSS in Dreamweaver MX 2004. For me, Dreamweaver is now nothing more than a $300.00 text editor―and I think it's time for me to move on.
I encourage you to take a look yourself. With a little time, you may learn that all that scary code you see in the visual editors is not the way your world has to be. I can't tell you all you need to know. But I can show you the door.
eric says
i remember back when i was just beginning my foray into the web design field, and naturally stumbled upon zeldman's site.
"so this is what people are up to?"
i got my own copy of "taking your talent to the web" and "designing web usability." now, i'm like some kind of xhtml/css zealot. you'd think it's common practice now, especially when you see all the kids nowadays who pick it up like it's nothing, but you'd be surprised how many people working in firms still rely on dreamweaver's layout mode.
Nathan Ladd says
I'm in the opposite situation, which makes it strange hearing about the issues from your point of view.
I've picked up XHTML and CSS2 rather easily, and am zealous in my defense of separating content from design. However, I don't have much design experience and find much of the designs on the web lacking -- except for those sites where the designer has a firm grounding in traditional print design and knows how to translate that onto the web.
I love printed media, have been learning a great deal more about type and print preprocessing, but don't know where to turn to learn design basics. Ultimately, I'd like to find a resource that can help me learn to design business documentation and technical writing, but that I can also translate to the web to help with usability and readability.
So far, there seems to be a dearth of material on those subjects in the marketplace now.
Rob Hulson says
Well said, Joshwa. You've got me interested in going beyond my basic knowledge of CSS.
pixelkitty says
This is a great article. I've been using Dreamweaver for years. Over the last three years I've only ever used it in code view. And never let DW generate code for me.
Recently I started using NoteTab light instead. No difference to the way I markup webpages and heaps less bloat, like you mentioned.
And also like you, I'm not a coder but a designer. Going down the CSS and XHTML trail is the best thing I ever did! Now all I have to do is become au fait with these two technologies and I might be getting somewhere.