jasonspage.net / blog / nodiv

  1. link
  2. link
  3. link
  4. link

Feedback?

Got something say about this method? Feedback is welcome here so leave a comment.

Subscribe to the RSS 2.0 comments feed.

17 Responses to “Feedback?”

At 2:08 am on May 10th, 2005, Jason wrote:

I am happy to announce that I painlessly was able to install WP 1.5 here to enable comments for the No Div method. Every voice counts so let’s hear what you have to say. Mac feedback would be sweet too! Thanks for stopping by.


At 5:18 pm on May 10th, 2005, Max Thrane wrote:

I got only 1 comment… This is pretty hardcore! Kudos!

Regards, MaxT


At 5:53 pm on May 19th, 2005, Central Scrutinizer wrote:

“Div al rogo!”

Mentre vagavo nel forum di wordpress alla ricerca di un problema dei permalink, ho scoperto il blog di uno degli utenti che ha creato questa pagina di integralismo dei marcatori:
No div, span, #id or .class.
Una bella ripulita al codice: mi piace que…


At 10:30 am on June 3rd, 2005, Matthijs wrote:

Hi, very nice indeed! A good example how lean it can be. I always try to minimize the amount of divs, but never got this far. Maybe next time 😉


At 5:31 am on June 7th, 2005, dannyFoo wrote:

good stuff.. but like you said, there are somethings we’d still need DIVs. Especailly in cases like designing wull websites for clients later. 🙂
cheers.


At 5:13 am on June 30th, 2005, mike wrote:

Excellent demo of minimal mark-up, but I have to ask:

1. Why titles on so many elements?

2. The css looks difficult to maintain. What would the difference be if a more standard CSS approach was employed?

I thought I was sorted just using a few id’s. But this is far better, though I do have maintenence concerns if applied to larger sites.

regards


At 4:16 pm on September 15th, 2005, Allan Rasmussen wrote:

Besides globally removing default margin and padding, one could consider to use an “un(do)html.css”, like Tantek has done for his site. I know I’m gonna do that next time for sure.

I don’t get why you’ve marked-up the first links as an ordered list? In my opinion it’s as much an unordered list as the one in the footer.
But worse do I find your use of the definition list, you want to define what a space is, with a google ad script?
And though the the coming HTML 5 advises you to use a pre element for larger code blocks, the XHTML 2.0 will give us a blockcode element, why it in my opinion is a lot more natural to use <code class=”block”> for such, with the current final standards.

Finally, removing IDs is absolutely not something to strive for, on all elements. For instance do I think it would be nice if every p element had a such, so you could link to it directly.

div and span elements are not evil. Of course they are currently being absolutely abused, and over used, on many sites, in many ways. But it is way more important to focus on the semantical markup of a site, than it is to make the markup minimal. And I’d claim your ‘nodiv’ design does the exact opposite.


At 12:56 pm on October 14th, 2005, Sam wrote:

Sure; div-less is good, but only on more static content. On dynamic content it would be much harder to stay div-less.


At 10:29 am on October 19th, 2005, rob wrote:

Ok, So assuming I was new to all this and had no idea what I was talking about (actually that’s not an assumption, it’s truth). What’s the big deal about Div’s? What were they made to do and how are they abused? Why is overusing them so bad?


At 5:50 pm on October 30th, 2005, Matt wrote:

Seems to me this can only be pulled off if the website has a limited number of fonts and styles it has to display.
If you use a different tag for each header-style (you used in this page) and you had, say, 8 different header-styles you would like to display, then you would run out of tags.

Love your approach, but it makes the design limited to a (fairly high and hard to reach) number of styles.


At 11:05 am on December 1st, 2005, Pepo wrote:

I love your approch of clean coding. It might be a little overdone, but the idea is good.


At 6:52 am on December 6th, 2005, Berry wrote:

I have to say, it’s cool.

Maybe I’ll use it someday, but I’m afraid just works well enough for now.


At 5:43 pm on December 7th, 2005, John wrote:

Why be difficult? Classes and ID’s were made for a reason. They give you more power over your content.

All you basically did was take a normal tag (block or inline-block type) and changed the default behavior. These tags are in essence a div or span tag that have default behaviors. They just give them special names for your convienence.

Yes, overuse of these tags may be annoying, but there is nothing wrong with using the language to its fullest.


At 10:39 am on February 25th, 2006, P.J. Onori wrote:

Very nice. I actually did a very similar project before I ran into your site. I thought it was only fair to give you credit after I found your site since yours was done well before mine. Great work.


At 6:25 pm on March 10th, 2006, Nick Presta wrote:

I don’t see any XHTML documents anywhere. This site is still plain old HTML =P


At 12:33 pm on April 9th, 2006, harold wrote:

Hello, i like to join the divless webring… lol :))

this is my last example-version of a divless-webdesign: http://webdesign.haroldbeukers.nl/divless_7.html

(and no needs of using ‘browser-hacks’)


At 6:43 am on May 7th, 2006, Herve wrote:

Thanks for these explanations. Without going into the technical aspect of comparing div power and markup definition, it looks to me like going ahead in many ways.

For instance, Search engines ranks better title than title and therefore gives benefits for web ranking, also accessibility..


Leave a Reply