[Wsuug] Conditional CSS revisited

[Reese]

Andrew Jaswa wrote:

> If by sparkling clean code you mean valid markup then I'm all for it.
> If you mean pretty code, I could care less. You can have valid ugly
> looking code. View source (CSS and JS) on gmail or really any Google
> web based product. Their code isn't "nice" looking. I'm sure that they
> have nice looking code that they produce on the backend of things
> before it gets processed by the servers. And I would bet that it is
> because they want maintainable code.

I don't see it as purely a validation or a pretty issue, though proper
use of whitespace does improve maintainability - as well as make it
easier to spot syntax errors.

> Umm... If written properly the "useful" uF don't really add that much
> work to markup because you are probably going to write classes for
> things.

Which microformats are "useful" and which are not, which ones rate
classes and which do not, is beyond the scope of whether or not the
conditional-css.com technique is an improvement over conditional
comments in the markup file. I was just saying that both add some
complexity, both improve the semantic value. What is the semantic
value of a conditional comment?

Reese