...

View Full Version : Yahoo's new homepage goes CSS



WA
10-02-2004, 12:34 AM
I just noticed that Yahoo's new (beta) homepage essentially uses CSS for styling. It's definitely interesting. Very messy pile of JavaScript within the source though. Here's a screenshot I took in case you can't switch to the new layout on Yahoo:

http://www.hostreach.com/yahoo.gif

Makes me want to go and see what I can clean up source code wide on JavaScript Kit. :)

gsnedders
10-02-2004, 01:07 AM
How do you change style?

As for JavaScript kit... It's OK... Better than the old Yahoo ;)

WA
10-02-2004, 01:10 AM
There's a link near the top of Yahoo that asks you to experience the new beta Yahoo. Clicking on that link will do it...

gsnedders
10-02-2004, 01:38 AM
Strange, I don't see anything of that sort...

Screenshot at http://geoffers.uni.cc/yahoo.jpg

Jan
10-06-2004, 12:39 PM
Strange, I don't see anything of that sort...

Screenshot at http://geoffers.uni.cc/yahoo.jpg

Error 404: Try out http://www.yahoo.com/beta


~Jan

gsnedders
10-06-2004, 07:27 PM
We would love for you to participate in the Front Page beta.

At this time, we do not have the new page programmed for your specific browser. We are working to have the page available to your browser in the coming week.

Please bookmark this page and check back next week to start using the new Yahoo! Front Page.

Wow! Most Mac friendly website ever... now... let's get Safari to lie about what browser I am using...

gsnedders
10-06-2004, 07:29 PM
OK, saying Safari was MSIE 6win got me in... But I don't like there coding style... Dunno why...

As for validating... 233 errors... 2 of them critical... The validator isn't finding the DOCTYPE or charactor encoding... If you tell the validator to use the HTML 4.01 Strict DOCTYPE (which the validator isn't finding) and UTF-8, it get's 410 errors :p

bradyj
10-06-2004, 08:19 PM
Yeah, it blocks safari users -- but firefox is fine. We've been discussing this over at whitespace, and arguing about some of their code:
1) Horribly unsemantic -- divitis if you ask me.
2) Obsessed with classes and id's? Probably would go away if it was semantic and the CSS was coded to utilize that.
3) Inline styles -- some people are debating that this method might be easier on their servers than having a seperate docuement that needs to be downloaded -- I would think it would ease downloads by cache, but that's arguable.
4) Incoherent names for the classes and id's - but I agree that may be to save more bandwidth by using a single letter or a couple letters rather than a full name. Again, though, you could cut most of this down by being semantic rather than tons of classes.

I'm excited to see a big corporate site go tableless and utilize CSS more -- don't get me wrong. But I don't know if they just don't have professionals working there with this knowledge, or they just don't have the time - the political clout - or care. It would be nice to see this one go validated and fully accessible -- it would most likely cut their code down and ease the strain. If I actually have the time, I may just do it for them for fun:)

gsnedders
10-06-2004, 08:32 PM
Don't you have the Debug menu Brady?

brothercake
10-06-2004, 10:38 PM
Makes me want to go and see what I can clean up source code wide on JavaScript Kit. :)
Rrrright ... so years worth of documented discussions among a forum full of talented and skilled developers hasn't convinced you ... but Yahoo changing their homepage has ...

Oh to have the luxury of such priorities :rolleyes: ;)

Regarding Yahoo though .. sorry to sound so scathing, but it's rubbish. It's unsemantic tag soup. It may be div soup instead of table soup, but it's still soup, and hardly better than it was before.

bradyj
10-06-2004, 11:06 PM
It's unsemantic tag soup. It may be div soup instead of table soup, but it's still soup, and hardly better than it was before.

Most of us agree:) I think the fact that they are going tableless, though, is a good first step. I doubt it's going to be a huge bandwidth saver unless they actually make it semantic and proper -- but the thought is enough to get notice.

Makes me wonder who they have employed at Yahoo, and why they haven't hired the codingforums team :cool:

gsnedders
10-06-2004, 11:20 PM
codingforums team :cool:The question is who. Who is the codingforums team?

brothercake
10-06-2004, 11:39 PM
I think the fact that they are going tableless, though, is a good first step. I doubt it's going to be a huge bandwidth saver unless they actually make it semantic and proper -- but the thought is enough to get notice.
Yeah but is it a good first step, or is it just paying lip service to a trend without trying to understand the reasons behind it? Is it good that this kind of thing gets noticed as an example of big sites moving away from tables, when what they're replacing it with is just as bad?

I think this will do far more harm than good from an advocacy perspective. What we have here is a shiny new design, made with any old ****ty code; just like the bad old days.

liorean
10-06-2004, 11:48 PM
The question is who. Who is the codingforums team?George Chiang and his band of merry men? Of whom I hope there is no demand for dressing in green tights...


I have to join in with James on the tables/div-id-classitis/semantic code issue. A nonsemantic CSS powered design is no better than a nonsemantic table powered design.

gsnedders
10-06-2004, 11:55 PM
George Chiang and his band of merry men? Of whom I hope there is no demand for dressing in green tights...

Please, David, don't remind me of the school play where I had to where tights... Luckily, they didn't fit :)

Back to my point, which of the George Chiang men...

bradyj
10-07-2004, 01:20 AM
Please, David, don't remind me of the school play where I had to where tights... Luckily, they didn't fit :)


The fact that it didn't fit gives me an even worse mental image.

Back on topic - I can see that point of view, and I can imagine that it will spawn hoards of designers swinging over to bloated div filled sites even more -- even worse, a frontpage that creates custom divs with classes on the fly :eek:

In that respect, I can imagine this design will be a further scron down a wrong path. But it is a different path.

Those guys have to see all this critique up, it amazes me that they don't do anything about it.

mindlessLemming
10-07-2004, 02:23 AM
I think this will do far more harm than good from an advocacy perspective. What we have here is a shiny new design, made with any old ****ty code; just like the bad old days.
Amen brother(cake).
Removing tables is only one piece of the semantic web puzzle. That part seems to be a long way from sinking in with the big guns. I see yahoo's redesign as the equivelant of microsoft slapping a DTD at the top of every page in their site and claming to be up to date with standards... Obviously it would have to an incomplete doctype though, or they may accidently throw their own browser into 'Standards mode' :D

Theoretically, any step in the right direction is a Good Thing, unfortunately these guys have missed the whole aim of the exercise :(

brothercake
10-07-2004, 04:22 AM
Obviously it would have to an incomplete doctype though, or they may accidently throw their own browser into 'Standards mode' :D
You may joke, but right there is the rub of a big problem for microsoft - how do they make MSHTML into a compliant engine while maintaining backward compatibility with their own tag soup - without trashing all of their own websites, and quite a big chunk of windows itself...

Knowing MS they'll probably make the entire CSS 2 module a non-default rendering option which can only be activated using a proprietary attribute :rolleyes:

But I'm hearing some strange names in this thread ... "David" .. "James" .. who are these people??

allida77
10-07-2004, 05:25 AM
I was going to try to defend some of yahoo but I am looking through the markup and just dont get it. Their new email system did a much better job but the myyahoo portal is just a mess.

I guess in defense of yahoo though, we do not know what kind of engine they have in the background that generates each module. It may not be so easy to rewrite some of this. Overtime they may be updating these modules to output more semantic markup.

liorean
10-07-2004, 11:21 AM
You may joke, but right there is the rub of a big problem for microsoft - how do they make MSHTML into a compliant engine while maintaining backward compatibility with their own tag soup - without trashing all of their own websites, and quite a big chunk of windows itself...By relying on two things: Anyone serving XHTML and XML will be prepared to take the incompatibilities. Most of those using Standards mode will as well. So, they can keep quirks mode and update standards mode. Sure, there will be some fuss over it, but nothing as compared to what could have been.
Knowing MS they'll probably make the entire CSS 2 module a non-default rendering option which can only be activated using a proprietary attribute :rolleyes:Oh, but we already have that one, it's produced by Dean Edwards under the name IE7...
But I'm hearing some strange names in this thread ... "David" .. "James" .. who are these people??Well, golly, I be thinking they might be my and your real name!

AaronW
10-07-2004, 01:44 PM
It's funny that Yahoo! of all major sites would probably have the easiest job of making a CSS layout without sacrificing any design (Ok, maybe Google, but it barely counts.) It's just a bunch of rectangles with borders and background colours.

So what's with the <--[if IE]>'s and javascript garbage? Are they still trying to support the ancient browsers like NS4?

Yahoo! has the most leverage when it comes to getting people to upgrade their browsers, wouldn't they? I mean, most normies (non-geeks) will probably start their Web surfing at Yahoo!, so if Yahoo! suddenly starts looking funny in their old browser, maybe then they'll finally get the hint?

Sure it's a terrible idea from a business perspective, but they ought to at least try to get people to upgrade their browsers in SOME way.

A dream, I guess. I'm hopped up on Tylenol cold, so hopefully my post doesn't sound really stupid when I sober up...

mindlessLemming
10-08-2004, 03:01 AM
Knowing MS they'll probably make the entire CSS 2 module a non-default rendering option which can only be activated using a proprietary attribute
Oh, but we already have that one, it's produced by Dean Edwards under the name IE7
Haha, nice one David. I still prefer the one IE has in place, "hasLayout". Its got cool marketing potential - they could copy the american "got milk?" ad campaign
http://stuff.mindlesslemming.com/got-layout.gif
:D

brothercake: Recheck the thread... no one ever wrote James, only David and George You dobbed yourself in Mr. Edwa... :p

brothercake
10-08-2004, 02:19 PM
brothercake: Recheck the thread... no one ever wrote James, only David and George You dobbed yourself in Mr. Edwa... :p
yes they did

I have to join in with James on the tables/div-id-classitis/semantic code issue.
See? It's not just my ego ;)

gsnedders
10-08-2004, 07:01 PM
But I'm hearing some strange names in this thread ... "David" .. "James" .. who are these people??Well, golly, I be thinking they might be my and your real name!

Can I join in?





So what's with the <--[if IE]>'s and javascript garbage? Are they still trying to support the ancient browsers like NS4?

It's for people who haven't yet got Camino, Firefox, Konqueror, Mozilla, Opera or Safari...

AaronW
10-08-2004, 08:56 PM
IE5+ are plenty capable of rendering that layout without hacks... MAYBE the box model hack.

mindlessLemming
10-08-2004, 11:53 PM
yes they did...
See? It's not just my ego ;)
lol... Please accept my humble apologies :D

Aaron: The benefit of hiding IE hacks within a conditional comment is that it means only IE users have to download the extra bandwidth and it also allows you to go to town with IE hacks, including .htc files without invalidating your primary stylesheet. <plug>By coincidence, I have discussed why I prefer conditional comments in my latest blog post (http://leftjustified.net/journal/2004/10/07/css-negotiation/)</plug>

allida77
10-11-2004, 03:19 PM
Looks like abcnews (http://abcnews.go.com/) has joined the club. Seems like a lot of their validation errors are from 3rd party and however they are generating their links. I think the markup is much cleaner though then myyahoo.

bradyj
10-11-2004, 05:59 PM
abc is a LOT more semantic, though, even with the few bugs in it -- but there's still one useless table in the mix, and some poor uses of CSS classes/id's.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum