pziecina wrote Thank you, at least you show you appreciate the problems. With the web and creation of web sites in particular, the first problem that must be solved is one of terminology, as I think everyone will agree that html and css are not easy to understand but must be understood. Lets take layouts by way of example - html5 has a semantic mark-up structure for the layout, in which every individual part of that layout has a specific meaning. The trouble is that it is structured and not very intuitive unless one learns that structure. I think we both can agree that designer or developer, we both sketch a page to a rough idea of how we want it to look. In dtp the structure uses simple terms and the flow would be something like, heading, sub-heading, body text, image, additional body text, footnote, erata. But in html5 one must not only decide if that translates to an element order of - h1, h3, p, img, p, ul/li, p. But also decide what the flow and the relationship to each other those elements have. So we could end up with an html structure of - main, section, article, h1, h3, p, article, h3, img, footer, p, ul/li, aside, p. Getting from a dtp structure to an html structure alone, and one that is understood by both groups is necessary just to define the layout, and not how the layout will flow on the actual web page, (thats for css). To get the dtp structure to an html structure, the first thing we require is some form of graphical interface in which the user defines what is to be included, the relationship each individual part has to each other, how each part should flow, and the hierarchy of each individual part, (you can have multiple h1's on a page if the html semantics used allow). Getting Dw let alone Adobe to think about such an idea though, i gave up on years ago. I think the advent of the 'way' that sites are coded is part of the problem. The 'flow' is a constraint. Perhaps there needs to be a rethink. Perhaps instead of working from a top to bottom, left to right 'flow' hierarchy we need to have options to radiate out from a fixed point that could be of our own choosing. Perhaps we need to be able to define the relationship between elements ie. this point on this container is this far from that point on that container, so that a page can be constructed in what to a viewer might seem a random way, but still remains mathematically structured from the software's point of view. In many ways this is already possible of course, but I'm talking about a more over-arching re-think of the 'typical' way that sites are structured. Perhaps ultimately it means that the code becomes really complex, and that tools need to be developed to assist coders (imagine that!). Ultimately if we code according to the common denominator (the average IQ of a coder) we will constrain ourselves, whereas if we use the power of the computer to write code that contains further complexity we have the capacity to advance ourselves, innovate and create in ways that are only constrained by the power of the designers imagination. Cheers
... View more