WDR #1: Versioned Style Sheets

Post from November 15, 2008 (↻ June 1, 2020), filed under Web Development.

This and many other posts are also available as a pretty, well-behaved ebook: On Web Development.

Ladies and gents, all I present’s… the Web Dev Report, issue #1:

The Web Dev Report: Versioned style sheets.

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 $#%@.)
Guy 1:: It’s sooo cool! Every time we modify our main style sheet we just append the date and have only certain pages use that CSS file. No messing with the old #$%@!
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” wasn’t known to Merriam-Webster and other dictionaries but it’s so popular, I decided to keep with it. More importantly, let’s see what happens to the report. Will there be an issue #2?

About Me

I’m Jens Oliver Meiert, and I’m an engineering manager and author. I’ve worked as a technical lead for Google, I’m close to the W3C and the WHATWG, and I write and review books for O’Reilly. Other than that, I love trying things, sometimes including philosophy, art, and adventure. Here on meiert.com I share some of my views and experiences.

If you have questions or suggestions about what I write, please leave a comment (if available) or a message.

Comments (Closed)

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 Oliver Meiert said:
Zacky, Dennis, 😊

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.

Have a look at the most popular posts, possibly including:

Looking for a way to comment? Comments have been disabled, unfortunately.