Working together for standards The Web Standards Project


Spiffy Markup?

By Ian Lloyd | April 5th, 2006 | Filed in CSS, Web Standards (general)

A new time-saving tool to create rounded corners constructed with CSS does the rounds – but is it really so spiffy?

Skip to comment form

I was a relative latecomer to the social bookmarking sites such as del.icio.us and digg, and even now I would not class myself as a regular visitor or power user. As a result I’m not sure that I properly understand the patterns that drive the results on these sites or appreciate exactly how it is that one web page/tutorial/news item gathers momentum while other gems remain undiscovered by such sites – so every now and then something pops up and surprises me. What’s surprised me today is how over 2000 people on digg (currently) found this worth a digg – Spiffy Corners.

Tell me, what is spiffy about this markup?

<div>
<b class="spiffy">
<b class="spiffy1">
<b></b>
</b>
<b class="spiffy2">
<b></b>
</b>
<b class="spiffy3"></b>
<b class="spiffy4"></b>
<b class="spiffy5"></b>
</b>
<div class="spiffy_content">
<!-- Your Content Goes Here -->
</div>
<b class="spiffy">
<b class="spiffy5"></b>
<b class="spiffy4"></b>
<b class="spiffy3"></b>
<b class="spiffy2">
<b></b>
</b>
<b class="spiffy1">
<b></b>
</b>
</b>
</div>

All this to achieve a rounded corner effect? I feel kinda bad to dis it rather than digg it – the creator Greg Johnson has obviously tried to create a simple way for people to implement this effect, and it is very quick to generate – but, as many of the commenters on digg have stated, it’s whole lot of non-semantic markup being generated here. CSS can do many things, but it needs to be paired with good, rock-solid and valid (X)HTML. Validated markup alone is not enough – semantics are important too (arguably more important).

Your Replies

#1 On April 5th, 2006 6:01 am