<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Say You About CSS Frameworks?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://idhana.com/2007/12/12/what-say-you-about-css-frameworks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://idhana.com/2007/12/12/what-say-you-about-css-frameworks/</link>
	<description>Making happy users!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 06:43:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Christopher</title>
		<link>http://idhana.com/2007/12/12/what-say-you-about-css-frameworks/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Christopher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idhana.com/2007/12/12/what-say-you-about-css-frameworks/#comment-2</guid>
		<description>If there&#039;s one time where I wish I hadn&#039;t used a sensationalist title for an article, &quot;Please Do Not Use CSS Frameworks&quot; would be it. It&#039;s not that I&#039;m completely against the use of frameworks, and I&#039;m going to have to handle the repercussions that have resulted from titling the article in that way.

As we all know, there has been quite a bit said about CSS frameworks, the pros, the cons, the who-cares. At the end of the day, I think many people (myself included) spoke about CSS frameworks when we really meant to talk directly about a CSS framework in particular. I&#039;m not against CSS frameworks in the general sense of the idea; I use a reset stylesheet. Many people consider that alone a CSS framework.

I apologize for the sensational title of my article, if I could change it, I would, and I&#039;ve posted a couple more articles directly in response to that piece to clear the air regarding my stance on CSS frameworks and the associated issues that come with it:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://mondaybynoon.com/2007/09/17/at-what-point-do-semantics-not-apply/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;At What Point Do Semantics Not Apply?&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://mondaybynoon.com/2007/11/19/closing-this-chapter-on-css-frameworks/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;CClosing this Chapter on CSS Frameworks&lt;/a&gt;

I think my only issue (for lack of a better word) with some of the larger pre-built CSS frameworks are the grid systems. I should have named and written my article in a more appropriate manner.

I&#039;m with you regarding the fact that it is up to the designer/developer whether or not to use CSS frameworks. I&#039;m thrilled so many people have become involved in the &#039;debate&#039; -- it really shows maturity of Web design. I think you and I have come to much of the same conclusion about CSS frameworks, and also shared a very similar thought process. Scary at first, but when you sit down and think about it (and realize you don&#039;t have to use something pre-built), a CSS framework can be truly helpful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If there&#8217;s one time where I wish I hadn&#8217;t used a sensationalist title for an article, &#8220;Please Do Not Use CSS Frameworks&#8221; would be it. It&#8217;s not that I&#8217;m completely against the use of frameworks, and I&#8217;m going to have to handle the repercussions that have resulted from titling the article in that way.</p>
<p>As we all know, there has been quite a bit said about CSS frameworks, the pros, the cons, the who-cares. At the end of the day, I think many people (myself included) spoke about CSS frameworks when we really meant to talk directly about a CSS framework in particular. I&#8217;m not against CSS frameworks in the general sense of the idea; I use a reset stylesheet. Many people consider that alone a CSS framework.</p>
<p>I apologize for the sensational title of my article, if I could change it, I would, and I&#8217;ve posted a couple more articles directly in response to that piece to clear the air regarding my stance on CSS frameworks and the associated issues that come with it:</p>
<p><a href="http://mondaybynoon.com/2007/09/17/at-what-point-do-semantics-not-apply/" rel="nofollow">At What Point Do Semantics Not Apply?</a></p>
<p><a href="http://mondaybynoon.com/2007/11/19/closing-this-chapter-on-css-frameworks/" rel="nofollow">CClosing this Chapter on CSS Frameworks</a></p>
<p>I think my only issue (for lack of a better word) with some of the larger pre-built CSS frameworks are the grid systems. I should have named and written my article in a more appropriate manner.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m with you regarding the fact that it is up to the designer/developer whether or not to use CSS frameworks. I&#8217;m thrilled so many people have become involved in the &#8216;debate&#8217; &#8212; it really shows maturity of Web design. I think you and I have come to much of the same conclusion about CSS frameworks, and also shared a very similar thought process. Scary at first, but when you sit down and think about it (and realize you don&#8217;t have to use something pre-built), a CSS framework can be truly helpful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
