New site CSS

I was just wondering if the new version of the site would include a legible page, if CSS was disabled. It would make it more accessible and follow web standards a bit more closely.

I am not judging the site, but just wondering why this has not been done yet.

Who turns off CSS? It hasn't been done because a) it's not a normal use case for anyone and b) the site is running on a code base that's four years old. There will be no change unless it's wholesale change.

I probably should not even comment, but feel compelled for some reason.

I am curious as to why anyone would turn off CSS, or expect some kind of web support for it?

I have dabbled in Web Stuff, and worked in IT for years. I have never heard of any reason, or anyone who turns off CSS.

Using CSS properly is part of web standards. http://www.standardzilla.com/2007/05/15/how-to-evaluate-your-website-in-30-seconds/

It makes the code more efficient.

It would also allow for easy style switching, which adds functionality.

And?

Somehow thousands of people come here every day and get something out of it. What are you even trying to say? Do you think that after doing this for a decade or so I've never heard of CSS?

I was curious about how you were going to implement it.

I have been making websites for half a decade. I still have much to learn. Do you think that just because you have been doing this for ten years, you have nothing new to learn? I was just interested in how you were going to implement the new site and whether it was going to include css. I am trying to learn what the best practice is.

You seem to follow the mantra if it ain't broke, don't fix it. However, how can you improve the website with that attitude?

The site is already using CSS!

Yes I know, but I was curious if it was going to use it more extensively.

What difference does it make? Site design requirements are not driven by technology, they're driven by the goals of the business.

If you navigate over to the Club page, you'll notice that the site already supports style switching for members.

The only thing missing from the site is a layout that is handled through divs rather than a table. Given that Pointbuzz was recently redesigned this way, I assume Jeff will do the same thing with Coasterbuzz when he finishes it.

At any rate, I'm curious why someone who needs to use a CSS template for his website thinks he knows enough to question a professional web developer.

Ugh...

I am not saying that he is not doing things the right way. I am just wondering why he has not integrated css more fully, because maybe I need to not focus on css for my full site designs. I thought he might have a really good reason for limiting css. Jeff has told me.

I am not a know it all telling Jeff what to do. I am trying to figure out the best practice for me in my sites. I do not need to rely on templates, however I liked that one and wanted to give credit to the designer.

CSS only needs to be implemented as much as the site calls for. There is no standard as to what is needed, whether it be number of classes, nor number of lines of CSS needed.

A site that is all "in house" which CoasterBuzz is needs nothing more than simple CSS. Hell, truthfully if it wasn't for Club style switching there would be no need for CSS on here other than to speed it up.

CSS can speed up sites, eliminating redundancies in code. The more you have isn't necessarily better, it all depends on how much of it is used.

And by the way, programmers hate it when CSS or HTML is called "code." It's "just" markup. :)

Unlike PostScript, I'm pretty sure neither is Turing-complete, for example...