Convert HTML/CSS into plain HTML - html

Is it possible to convert HTML + CSS into HTML for a system that doesn't handle CSS, not even inline CSS?
What options do I have?

No. Much of what CSS does is not possible with HTML alone. Your best option is to design your site in such a way that when it loses CSS, it still renders in a nice and orderly fashion. Pay very close attention to things like Heading Tags, paragraph tags, lists, etc. Be sure to build semantically-correct sites, and they (in most cases) will degrade quite nicely.

The only thing you can do is add styles that were possible with old html3+ attributes and font tags. Quite a bit of stuff is possible, but none of it is going to be automatic. You can go through pretty much everything in css and try to find it's html3+ attribute equivalent.
Things like background font b i center width height are examples of old attributes (or tags in the case of font) that define style (and should generally be ignored these days). I don't envy the work ahead of you, but just make a happy medium between reasonable things and unreasonable styles. Tables also might come in handy for floats as well.
Sounds like an old mobile device?

If you can't use any CSS, I would imagine you would have to resort to possibly deprecated HTML tags/attributes, like font tags and attributes like bgcolor.
This would probably be rather difficult, because to my knowledge you can't achieve everything you can do with CSS, like positioning for example. You would have to switch your layout to use tables and set align, valign, etc.

use this first
http://www.mailchimp.com/labs/inlinecss.php
then replace css with deprecated html
http://www.highdots.com/css-editor/articles/css_equiv.html

Two words: Image Maps :) (I've actually seen sites that, in order to "render correctly on every browser" literally just make a big fancy image the background, and add links accordingly via an image map)

Related

Why are div:s preferred in website design?

I have search for the topic mentioned above but I didn't find good satisfying answer.
What are the benefits of using divs only in html page ?
What else should be taken care while designing a web page ?
Please help...
Thanks
They aren't. Div is just a generic element that gets used when no appropriate semantic markup is available.
The most appropriately semantic markup combined with CSS is preferred.
This separates concerns and increases device independence and reusability of content.
By applying different (or no CSS), the same content will "Just work" on mobile, desktop, aural, print and so on.
Have a look this: http://webdesign.about.com/od/htmltags/qt/tipdivtag.htm
Divs are useful when you want to style elements and might want to move them around independently.
Designers used to use tables to layout pages, before the days of CSS, as a way to position major page elements. Now you can use divs and CSS to do the same thing and have a lot more flexibility.
To see what you can do with divs, check out http://www.csszengarden.com/.
Tables still make sense when you've got tabular data, and tables are styleable with CSS. For example gmail uses tables for emails when looking at an inbox.
You probably already know this, but to see what people are using you can inspect some pages. In Chrome right click on something and choose 'inspect element'. You can see the elements, their structure and the styles. There is something similar in recent versions of all the major browsers.
I think that it is best to use divs and tables together. Don't use either with out consideration, just because people say that it's the correct thing to do. Rather think about why or how you are going to use it and what it is going to contain. Everything should be there for a reason, otherwise it's just cluttering up the code.

Html/ css coding standards

I'm building my first website for an internship. My instructors always told me to never embed any styles on my html page.Now that I'm actually creating a site I find it annoying that, if I want to change the color of my font for a span tag - I have to I.D. it and reference it in a css file. Is there some other reason then organizational purposes for using CSS? Would embedding a single style be such a convention breaker? Thanks for reading this and I'd appreciate any feedback.
There are a couple of reasons.
Times when you want to change the style of a single element on a single page should be exceedingly rare, so it shouldn't be such a hardship. Any other time, it is going to be more efficient (from an HTTP caching perspective) and easier to maintain (from a separation of style and structure perspective) to externalize the style information.
Since there is a good chance that you'll want to style it differently for different media (e.g. screen and print), you'll need a proper stylesheet for that too.
If you embedd a style to several HTML pages, and want to change it later, you have to go file by file changing it. That is one good enough reason for me.
The key word here is maintainability. Organized code is maintainable code! It is far better to add an id to a tag and reference it in the global css file than to do it inline, because if you want to change that style later, you know where to find it, and you only have to change it in one place.
The reason you want to offload the CSS into a different file is so the browser can cache it. Otherwise, the browser has to load all the CSS as well as all the markup on every page. If you keep it in a separate file, the browser only has to load the CSS once.
The basic argument for this is that HTML's purpose is to provide structure while CSS's job is to provide styling, by embedding CSS in HTML you're breaking this basic rule. Plus, you'll have a tough time in maintaining pages.
Ideally, a design should be consistent enough that you can use generic rules for such situations. If you want to emphasize something, then <em> or <strong> is likely the way to go. After styling your <em> or <strong>, you can easily add the same emphasis to other areas of the site.
It's not simply about performance or style, it's also about consistency and ease of maintenance.
Find the similar elements in your design and mark them up similarly. It's as easy as that.
Even if it's "just 1" you should still do it because it helps you get in the habit of it.
embedded css has the following problems:-
1. It has browser compatibility problem. Example Ie has problem understanding inbuilt styling.
2. If you want to use the same css style again , it is better to have a class for it.

Should we always consider how page will look without CSS?

If yes then presentational elements would be helpful in this condition so should we use those?
<b>…</b> , <i>…</i>, <big>…</big>, <small>…</small>, <tt>…</tt>, <hr />
These are valid tags
The page should be marked up semantically, not for its presentation. If you put proper semantic markup on elements, the browser will usually apply a basic style to them by itself. You should not be concerned with how the document looks unstyled. If it's unstyled, it has no style. CSS is responsible for the style. If a user chooses to view the document without style, let it be so.
Generally a ("normal") user cannot disable CSS as easy as JavaScript.
So I would answer NO.
CSS is a part of the presentation and when the CSS is not available we should think that the presentation is not available. Thus the client side is broken.
You should not be concerned about that as you don't want to debug a client abusing the presentation.
BUT, if you need to support non-standard devices (old mobiles maybe) this is a valid concern. Still instead of changing the page to "fit all sizes", you should have a separate page for such devices.
Not sure about tt (I guess you can use).
But b, i should be replaced by strong and em respectively.
big and small should not be used IMO and be replaced by alternative tags depending on the semantics.
Technically, you could pretty much create an entire page using <div> and <span> tags. That would just be messy though, and not very intuitive. Personally, I find that the tags you list make it easier for a human to parse what the page is attempting to communicate, while also offering the benefit of making a page readable when the CSS doesn't load.
It sounds like you're asking if you should use tags like <small> so that, in the absence of CSS, what you want to be small will be small.
No.
The reason to consider how the page will look without CSS is to know if you are using good semantic layout. If it's usable, your HTML, which is only designed with semantic organization in mind, is okay. That's it. If your users, for whatever reason, don't want to support presentational things like CSS, don't use presentational tags.
And, really. If your users don't have CSS for whatever reason, they don't deserve to see something as bold. It's more work for you, it's not semantic, and no one will ever care.

Is using the style attribute frowned upon?

As someone who is beginning to make a transition from table based design to full CSS I'm wondering if using the style attribute to make adjustments to elements is considered "cheating" and if absolutely ALL presentation should be strictly in the style sheet?
See also:
A question of style - approaches to styling and stylesheets
There are cases where you know for sure that all you want to do is tweak the style of this one specific element, and nothing else.
In those cases you can happily use an inline style attribute. But then, at some point in the future, you'll realise that in fact you need to apply the same style to something else, and you'll realise you were wrong.
Been there, done that. 8-)
I feel there's an aspect that has not been touched upon here: the distinction between hand-edited HTML snippets and generated HTML snippets.
For human editing, it's probably better and easier to maintain to have the styles in a file.
However
As soon as you start generating HTML elements, with server-side scripts or with some kind of JavaScript, be sure to make all styles required for basic functionality inline!
For example, you wrote some kind of JavaScript library that generates tooltips. Now, you will inject DIVs into your page, that will need some styles. For example, position: absolute and, initially, display:none. You may be tempted to give these elements the class .popup and require that this class has the correct definitions in some CSS file. After all, styles should be specified in the CSS file, right?
You will make your JavaScript library very annoying to reuse, because you can no longer simply copy and invoke one .js file and be done with it. Instead, you will have to copy the .js file, but also have to make sure that all styles required by the script are defined in your CSS file, and you have to go hunting for those, and make sure their names don't conflict with classes you already have.
For maximum ease of use, just go ahead and set the required styles directly on the element as you create it. For styles that are purely for aesthetical purposes, such as background-color, font-size and such, you can still attach a class, to give the consumer of your script an easy way to change the appearance of your script elements, but don't require it!
You can use the style attribute, but the point of using CSS is that you make a change in a single file, and it affects the entire site. Try to avoid it as much as possible (old habits die hard)
It's not maintainable. All of us have done it. What you're best to do is put every adjustment into a style. Let me teach you something most developers do not know about CSS ... you can use N styles at a time.
For example, imagine you have a great style for colorized divs called someDIVStyle:
.someDIVStlye
{
background-color: yellow;
...
}
You want to use it, but just want to adjust the background-color to blue. Many people would copy/paste it and then make a new style with the change. However, simple create a style like this:
.blueBackground
{
background-color: blue;
}
Apply it as such:
<div class="someDIVStyle blueBackground">...
The style furthest to the right always overrides the properties of the styles preceding it. You can use a number of styles at once to meet your needs.
I agree with some other posters that it is best to keep the style information in the stylesheet. CSS tends to get complicated quickly, and it is nice to have that information in one place (rather than having to jump back and forth from HTML to stylesheet to see what styles are being used).
A little off-topic tip: Pressing F12 in IE8 brings up a great tool that lets you inspect the styles of elements in web pages you're browsing. In Firefox, FireBug does the same thing. Those kinds of tools are lifesavers if you want to know how a style change will affect an element.
It's a very "personal" question, to me the word "ALL" is a very strong word. You should do your best to have most of the styling in your css. but you can use style occetionally if it makes your life easier.
Generally it is best to have styles on the style sheet especially if it will be used multiple times, but using the style attribute is definitely not "cheating". A quick look through the stackoverflow source shows many examples of this.
Yes, it's kind of cheating, but it's up to you if you want to cheat a little. :)
The fundamental idea of having the styles in a style sheet is to separate the content from the layout. If you use the style attribute you are still mixing layout within the content.
However It's not that terrible, as you can quite easily move the style into a class. It's quite handy during development to be able to set a style on a specific element so easily without having to make up a class name and worry how the style will cascade.
I sometimes let the style attribute go through in the production code, if it's something that is specific for just one page, and if it's doubtful that it will be there for long. Occationally just because I am pressed for time, and it can be cleaned up later on...
So, even if you use a style attribute sometimes, you should still have the ambition that all the styles should be in a style sheet. In the long run it makes the code easier to maintain.
As others have said, in general, no.
However, there are cases where it makes perfect sense. For example, today I had to load an random background image into a div, from a directory with an unknown # of files. Basically, the client can drop files into that folder and they'll show up in the random background image rotation.
To me, this was a clear reason to dynamically build up the style tag on the div.
In addition, if you're using, for example, the .net framework with webforms and built-in controls then you'll see inline styles used anyway!
There can be very good reasons to put style information in a specific page.
For example, if you want to have a different header background on every page (travel agencies...), it is far easier to put that style information in that specific element (better, in the head of the document...) than to give that element a different class on every page and define all those classes in an external style-sheet.
The style attribute does have one important use: setting style programmatically. While the DOM includes methods to manipulate style sheets, support for them is still spotty and they're a bit heavyweight for many tasks, such as hiding and showing elements.
Yes, the style attribute is frowned upon in general. Since you're moving to the CSS method from table-based, I'd strongly recommend that you avoid inline styles. As a previous poster pointed out: bad habits are hard to break and getting into the habit of using inline styles for their temporary convenience is a mistake. You might as well go back to using the font tag. There's really no difference.
Having said that, there are occasions where it makes sense to use a simple inline style, but first develop the habit of using stylesheets. Only when you're comfortable with putting everything in a stylesheet should you start looking at shortcuts.
I think that's the general consensus of everyone who posted an answer

Is there a standard HTML layout with multiple CSS styles available?

When it comes to web-design, I am horrible at producing anything remotely good looking. Thankfully there are a lot of free sources for design templates. However, a problem with these designs is that they just cover a single page, and not many use cases. If you take a look at CSS Zen Gardens, they have 1 single HTML file, and can radically style it differently by just changing the CSS file.
Now I am wondering if there is a standard HTML layout (tags and ids), that covers alot of use cases, and can be generically themed with different CSS files like Zen Garden. What I am imagining is a set of rules off how you write your html, and what boxes, lists, menus and styles you are supposed to use. A set of standard test pages covering the various uses can be created, and a new CSS file while have to support all the different pages in a nice view.
Is there any projects that covers anything similar to what I am describing?
Check out the Grids framework from YUI. Particularly awesome is the Grid Builder. Also, they have a set of reset, base, and font CSS files that will give you a good baseline to build on.
I generally just try to follow the guidelines set by the HTML standard itself.
Headings go in "h" tags (so one H1 tag for the main heading, then one or more H2 tags under that etc).
Free text gets grouped in paragraphs in P tags.
Logically-grouped sections of information go in DIV tags.
Any kind of list (even menus that you eventually might want horizontally laid out) belong in list tags like UL, OL or DL.
Tables of information go in TABLE tags. DON'T use table tags for layout.
Be smart with your ID and CLASS attributes. Keep IDs unique and assign them to elements that you know represent something unique on the page, like a navigation menu or a page footer. Assign the same class to elements that are repeated but similar (which you might want to render with a similar visual style).
I always start with a very plain, vertical page - just run everything I want down the page in black and white. Then I start adding CSS to make sure the bits are formatted and laid out the way I want.
Take a look at the source of my home page for an example of what I'm talking about.
I've used Bluprint CSS, it's easy and useful as you'll see. It also has some ruby scripts that allow you to change the number of columns and the distance between them. By default it's 950px for a span-24 element.
BluePrintCSS was, from what I know, the first CSS framework.
As YUI CSS Framework, It's help you to handle layout.
That kind of framework will help you to build multiple CSS for your site.
BluePrintCSS is a quite mature project so I encourage you to check it out.