WDR #1: Versioned Style Sheets
Jens Meiert, November 15, 2008 / November 30, 2008.
This entry is filed under Web Development.
Ladies and gents, all I present’s … the Web Dev Report, issue #1:
Transcript. (Marked up in reference to § 10.3, yet missing the dialog element.)
- Guy 1:
- Hey man, how’s it going?
- I gotta tell you … these versioned style sheets damn rock …!
- So, like default-20080301.css, default-20080623.css, default-20081012.css …
- Guy 2:
- (What the $#%@.)
- Guy 1:
- It’s sooo cool! Everytime we modify our main style sheet we just append the date and have only certain pages use that CSS file. No messing with the old #$%@!
- Guy 2:
- So you treat your one site as several sites?
- Guy 1:
- Er.
- Guy 2:
- And with a redesign you want the kick to either update all versioned style sheets or update all documents to use the new default CSS?
- Guy 1:
- Err …
- Guy 2:
- And HTML/CSS prototypes are a waste of time and money, right?
- Guy 1:
- What the $#%@ man, leave me alone!
“Versioned” was an interesting term to use here as Merriam-Webster and other resources don’t officially know it. It seems to be popular anyway though, so I decided to use it. More importantly, let’s see what happens to the report. Will there be issue #2? Will there?
Read More
Enjoy the most popular posts, probably including:
Comments
-
On November 15, 2008, 13:09 CET, Zacky said:
Accessible Comic
-
On November 15, 2008, 14:23 CET, Dennis Frank said:
Will there be issue #2?
So mean versioned Web Dev Reports?
Looking forward to this.
-
On November 15, 2008, 14:33 CET, Phil Nash said:
Who does this?!!!
-
On November 15, 2008, 17:27 CET, Jens Meiert said:
Zacky, yes, this is how we roll
Dennis, most likely there will be at least numerated Web Dev Reports – unless I get sued for explicit language of comic characters.
Phil, oh, that’s not too uncommon I fear. And still, it – style sheet versioning, this way – doesn’t make much sense, no.
-
On November 15, 2008, 17:56 CET, Tony said:
Accessible and sincere, plus it’s a comic so is good for the heart, great! I’ll be waiting for the next one
-
On November 16, 2008, 9:52 CET, Kroc Camen said:
You should do one about the accessibility benefits of:
<html><body><object ... /></body></html> -
On November 17, 2008, 16:37 CET, Andrei said:
I’ve never heard of “versioned” stylesheets…
The closest I’ve ever come across are “sectional” stylesheets (navigation, content, reset, footer, etc.), but those make a ton of sense - you simply “save” the old section stylesheet into an archive folder, and overwrite the one on the server with the updated one.
Easy.
-
On November 22, 2008, 1:10 CET, Jens Nedal said:
I love that one. I thought versioning was left to CVS or SVN? In what sinkhole would i have to live to try versioning my files in this fashion. I shiver at the thought of someone out there actually doing it that way.
-
On December 18, 2008, 18:45 CET, yurik said:
and why is it bad to version number style sheets?
I’m feeling like the “err” guy right now…and to reply the question that you might be thinking: no i don’t version my style sheets (yet)
unless i figure out the reason why not to.
note1: i use server side language that combines all the style sheets into one big one, so when changing my style sheet version number, i just change a small thing in my server side script, and everything will work fine with no time wasted…or will it?.
note2: I know that Etags were invented for this style sheet file version separation, but they aren’t much help.
