COT = Completely Of Topic
Just though I would let those interested know that the css grid layouts spec has been updated, and that a few features may be 'ignored' in order to speed up making it a recommendation -
https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/CR-css-grid-1-20170209/
Currently FF has 9 more features in order to be compliant, and Chrome 7 features.
The features, at risk of dropping, (probably will be) are -
- the subgrid value
- overflow applied to subgrids
- the <percentage> value in grid-row-gap/grid-column-gap (low priority)
- application of grid placement to absolutely-positioned boxes
Which basically means that, FF has 3 in order to pass, and Chrome 1.
Also I would like to explain, (sorry Ben, no insult intended) what the specs meen when they say flexbox is one direction, and grids 2 dimension, and it has nothing to do with how one uses them, but how one defines them.
If you look at the 2 following diagrams -
Exemplary Flex Layout Example
Exemplary Grid Layout Example
You will I hope see the meaning, but for those who do not, it is the alignment of the containers, flexbox does not allow someone to tell the flex child item to span 2x the vertical space, without extra css and possibly html mark-up, css grids does this without extra mark-up -
The W3C specs says -
Although many layouts can be expressed with either Grid or Flexbox, they each have their specialties. Grid enforces 2-dimensional alignment, uses a top-down approach to layout, allows explicit overlapping of items, and has more powerful spanning capabilities. Flexbox focuses on space distribution within an axis, uses a simpler bottom-up approach to layout, can use a content-size–based line-wrapping system to control its secondary axis, and relies on the underlying markup hierarchy to build more complex layouts. It is expected that both will be valuable and complementary tools for CSS authors.
As an aside -
If the css grid features are to be 'dropped' as the specs say they may, then there is likely that both flexbox and grids will become recommendations at roughly the same time.
57
Replies
Even the W3C keeps amending how the try to clarify the 1/2 dimensional aspect, and they still cannot find a clear way that define exactly what they mean. Having written specs I can sympathise with them, but I still laugh when I read how they try and write it 
.
Just as a little update.
If Dw does not include better flexbox/grid/multi-column support in the next version, then I will post a link to the code I am using to modify the css designer to do so. It is not complete yet, as I am trying to think of the best way to include both the new and old, (IE) syntax, but I may have to make them separate selections. Flexbox and multi-column is complete though, and with vendor prefix support.
Paula,
You couldn't be "completely off topic" if you tried. 
Thanks for taking the time to write this mini-tutorial. Always enjoy and appreciate what you have to say. (That last bit goes the same for Nancy, Ben, Jon, Os, Rob, Peran, and Murray.)
Chris
If anyone is interested, you can get an idea of using grids for layout from -
http://gridbyexample.com/examples/
And to give credit to where I found the link -
https://webflow.com/blog/18-web-design-trends-for-2017
(Just for you OS, read section 9 
)
The problem with the videos and examples being posted, is that they all remind me of what happened with another css layout spec, about 5 years ago. So I'll probably be long gone from anything to do with web development, by the time grids start to be used mainstream, (and Dw will still not have support by then ).
Osgood wrote -
"Its already happening in all these pre-built templates which are available."
The main audience with pre-built templates is amateurs, or graphic designers who have no idea about the web. Just look at the number of new sites using images of text and ignoring accessibility, (Muse uses images for showing system fonts 
).
BenPleysier wrote
there is Muse and Webflow and Wordpress and Bloc and WixJust lost another customer to WordPress. Someone had talked him into it and when I explained that I am a proper web developer, his reaction was, I don't care, I want the result. PHPMail or SMTP, Flexbox or Tables, they don't care. They want a good looking site that rates high on Google.
That's why we are losing the game against the likes of Muse etc.
Ten years ago my knowledge of Wordpress was zilch - then clients started to become really aware of the platform, and I began developing custom themed client sites in WP. It's merely a different approach, but the same techniques apply. I use html, scss/css, js, and php as before, but within the WP 'ecosystem'. Makes hardly any difference (excepting the transition to that ecosystem, which was frustrating).
In my experience custom theme and plugin coding in WP is quite lucrative, since there aren't that many developers around who can actually code a custom theme, or convert an existing static theme/site design to WP. Of course, there are those clients who merely require a 'quick fix' and install an existing theme. But you'd be surprised how quickly clients realize they have to write some custom css to adjust the theme's design to their liking, and most have no clue how to do that. Which is where I come in again. Often I even feel like I am becoming more of a WP consultant 
. One-eye is truly king in the land of the blind, as the saying goes. If anything, because of the prevalence of Neanderthal-friendly mobile technology, (younger generation) users arguably are becoming less technically savvy than they seemed to be a decade ago.
Nope, WP has been very, very good for my business. I still have a love-hate relationship with WP (still think its theming code is bloated and convoluted junk), but almost no-one of my clients wants a static website or hand-coded PHP back-end anymore. And I can't say I blame them. Clients can have a fully-functional and easy to manage web shop in a matter of days, rather than weeks or months.
I say, follow where the wind blows. If your clients want Wordpress, give them Wordpress - and charge the same money (or more!).
AdChoices