[geeklog-devel] CSS-Layout possible!

[Oliver Spiesshofer]

I agree with you on the general point. I do not think we should try to 
keep the old layouts running forever however.
I rather make half a step in the right direction and force some people 
to switch a variable from one file to the other to follow.

However I wonder if we could not change the assembly of the whole page 
so that all three elemets are in one template file instead of in three.
Something like

{header}
<div>{center}</div>
<div>{leftblocks}</div>
<div>{rightblocks}</div>
{footer}

This would allow get rid of the whole problem because we could enable 
optional styles/classes for the center block in case the left blocks are 
empty.
And for those who prefer tables, it would work, too.

We would have a COM_siteHeader, COM_siteBody and COM_siteFooter then, 
and a lot of issues less.
This is a bit larger change to the core code however, but I think it 
should not be too complicated.
We also would not need any aditional options in functions, simply an 
optional class for the central block.

Oliver

Mark R. Evans wrote:

> Oliver,

>

> Very cool, but my first thought is what is really gained by doing this?  I

> understand the benefit of cleaner code, but just how much is really

> eliminated by removing the table that currently drives the layout?

>

> I've been involved in many 'discussions' on tables vs CSS and I've yet to

> see a convincing argument for either approach.  Each solution seems to have

> its place in the world.  Generally the benefits of a CSS only solution is

> that it makes the content available to more users.  For example, if you are

> using a browser that does not support the CSS (screen readers, tools used by

> those who are visually impaired, etc.), CSS degrades very well.  The typical

> 3 column layout is center, left, right in a CSS solution.  This way, if the

> CSS cannot be interpreted, the main content is shown first. 

>

> With this solution, it actually moves it to the end, so that the right, left

> and then center content would be shown.  At least in the current table

> layout, you get left then center.  So we are back to what are the true

> benefits of a CSS only solution?

>

> Also, we are starting to see some very nice themes come out for Geeklog.  I

> would hate to see each of them break on the next release and I'm afraid that

> could be the result if the right / left blocks are both in the header.  If

> this could be implemented as an option so that legacy themes can still work,

> I think that would be an acceptable approach.

>

> I do think your solution is very good and I only wish I had the skills to do

> something similar.  I'm just not clear on the problem that is actually being

> solved.

>

> Thanks!

> Mark

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: geeklog-devel-bounces at lists.geeklog.net

> [mailto:geeklog-devel-bounces at lists.geeklog.net] On Behalf Of Oliver

> Spiesshofer

> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 9:48 PM

> To: Geeklog Development

> Subject: [geeklog-devel] CSS-Layout possible!

>

> Hi guys,

>

> I found a way how to make a CSS-only layout (no tables) that takes into

> account that sometimes we do not have any right (or left) blocks.

> The important thing here is that the right or left column vanishes visually

> completely.

>

> The issue with the solution is that the right blocks have to be in the

> sourcecode _before_ the center block. Otherwise the right float does not

> work.

>

> If you want to take a look, please open

>

> http://tokyoahead.com/test.html

>

> In order to make this work, we have to change the COM_siteHeader and

> COM_siteFooter so that both right and left blocks are shown by the

> siteHeader function.

>

> This would allow a much greater flixibility to the layout since two of the

> three major design elements would come from one function and be in one

> layout file. Only he center content would be appended in the end.

>

>  From my point of view there is nothing to object to that, the overall

> layout could look exactly the same, there could be a reduction in template

> code and a much larger flexibility for template coders, not to mention that

> we would stop using tables for layout.

>

> Still, before I do this, I would like to hear if there are any objections to

> that.

>

> Oliver

> _______________________________________________

> geeklog-devel mailing list

> geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net

> http://eight.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/geeklog-devel

>

> _______________________________________________

> geeklog-devel mailing list

> geeklog-devel at lists.geeklog.net

> http://eight.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/geeklog-devel

>

>

>