Re: Website for mlmmj

[Raymond den Ouden <raymond@den-ouden.info>]

Thomas Goirand wrote:

>Raymond den Ouden wrote:
>  
>
>>I myself hate such default templates.
>>
>>No offense, but they are often bady built. I always split the content
>>from the layout. Then even blind people can use it, or people with text
>>browsers like lynx or links, which I often use when downloading files.
>>If mads likes one it's often easy to make a proper design for that.
>>    
>>
>
>On my experience with those templates, they ARE done the way you say,
>most of the time using pure CSS design with div tags.
>
>  
>
If so ignore my comment, but in the five years I worked as web-developer 
fulltime I have seen too many bad of such templates.
Another thing why I dislkike them is because they look too default, do 
you get what I mean?

>>CMS systems are not silly, probably cpu eaters, but often very useful,
>>especially when you make a site which has to be maintained by someone
>>else who can't build proper HTML pages. Although static HTML is the
>>fastest and most stable way of hosting.
>>    
>>
>
>My mean is only to say that it's a bit silly to use a (CPU eater) CMS
>when we all know html, and when the content WILL be static.
>  
>
Then we agree on this point I think.
HTML is fast and stable with "no" flaws.
CMS's are for "silly" users who can't or don't want to do proper HTML 
themselves.

>Thomas
>
>
>!DSPAM:45793237219601072125841!
>
>  
>