Computer: Web: Formatting
Cascading Template Sheet + Cascade Style Sheet ( CTS + CSS )   (+3)  [vote for, against]

Is it just me, or is html ended up being convoluted again.

I like the concept of presentation+information separation. Where the '.html' only contains information, and pointers to presentational data. Which is pretty cool, especially from an accessibility point of view.

Initial attempt was CSS. Removing inline styling in html was solved by keeping the styling in a separate style sheet.

This worked pretty well for many site, especially simpler sites. And made for faster load times as well!

However, complexity is crreeping in again, in the sense that the layout of the `<div>` in complex css based websites is soon getting in the way of the information at the source code. Full of hacks like empty divs, for spacing content out etc...

Why not notice in some server sided solutions, that they are separating the layout presentation from the actual information as "template files".

That sounds like something we can work towards.

As for how it exactly may work, I'm not too sure, but I would imagine it would be quite similar to html, but would try to match classnames and ids etc to corresponding slots in this `.cts` file. And I would think the template file can point to css etc.

Seems to me that in other CMS, template files are essentally HTML but with `include functionality`.

Either way, CSS is probably not enough for the 21st to 22nd century web.
-- mofosyne, Nov 17 2014

http://keithclark.co.uk/articles/pure-css-parallax-websites/ http://keithclark.c...-parallax-websites/
This shows usage of divs that doesn't hold content, but rather is for background structure [mofosyne, Nov 23 2014]

Server Side Includes is baked, but the real problem is that HTML isn't that great of a markup language, especially given that the whole "semantic web" thing didn't pan out.
-- Spacecoyote, Nov 17 2014


It does seem a weakness of HTML that you can mark text up with style and layout directions like "<H1>" and also low-level presentation directions like "<FONT>". Ideally, only the style and layout tags would be allowed, and everything else would be in CSSs.

As an aside, Microsoft Word has the same weakness - text can have fonts, colours, etc. applied to it, but also styles. Combining these gets documents into a ghastly mess and ideally only styles would be allowed.
-- hippo, Nov 17 2014


something like that i guess? But more friendlier like css?

XSLT seems like a big wooly ball of coding nope... or maybe we just need to get used to it... if it's used in a html browser context.
-- mofosyne, Nov 17 2014


I would like to make "my own damn version of HTML", but I'd probably just end up with Display PostScript plus hyperlinks.
-- Spacecoyote, Nov 18 2014


<font> is a low-level presentation thing?
-- pocmloc, Nov 18 2014


Yes, because it directly affects the look of the document. Font descriptions should be used in CSSs, not in the HTML page itself. This allows control over the document's appearance to be governed by changes you make to the stylesheet or by swapping your CSS file for another one. If you do this, content is properly separated from presentation.
-- hippo, Nov 18 2014


I like this. I read it as content, structure, presentation. Structure is the template. Right now, HTML mashes structure and content together. Any decent desktop publishing program will separate the three (layout, text/images, styles).
-- the porpoise, Nov 20 2014


Well html had to mash all these into a single page, because remember it was developed during the Beep Bloop modem days.
-- mofosyne, Nov 21 2014


That's like saying Roman Numerals couldn't have a zero, because it was developed in ancient times. If someone had thought of it, it could've happened.
-- Spacecoyote, Nov 22 2014


Added link to a pretty cool CSS trick called pure css parallax.

It shows empty divs that has non 'informational/content' purpose (its a background layer at different perspectives)
-- mofosyne, Nov 23 2014



random, halfbakery