Dear Clients, The Web Has Changed. It’s Time To Use CSS3 and HTML5 Now.

Advertisement

Since hearing about HTML5 and CSS3, then later reading Hardboiled Web Design by Andy Clarke, I have been working on a presentation to help me introduce these development methods to my clients. If all I said to them was, “These are the latest development methods, but there will be visual differences in your website across browsers,” I’m sure you can imagine the response I would get.

Most of my clients these days tell me they want the following:

  1. HTML to validate as Strict or Transitional,
  2. CSS to validate,
  3. Website that meets Accessibility Level 2+,
  4. Design that looks the same across all browsers.

They have learned this information from us, developers and agencies, who have educated the world over the last 10 years on best practices. Now we need to re-educate them, and it won’t be easy! Most people steer away from things they don’t understand out of fear of the unknown.

Re-Educating Your Client

Generally speaking, you would start by discussing what the client currently knows, and telling them why these methods are out of date and need to be changed. Following this, you would talk about how we do things now, explaining why these ways are better. Let’s begin.

How We Used To Develop

browser compatability balm

Around 40% of our time is dedicated to making our websites look pixel-perfect across all browsers. We used to make sure that a website rendered exactly the same across all browsers (or as close to it as possible). But this didn’t guarantee that the website would work on all devices and phones.

The old way of developing websites was longwinded and is out of date. The notion of delivering an identical visual experience to users on every browser (to the closest pixel) originated in the print world.

We need to remember that the Web as we know it has changed. We are no longer in 2004, developing for Internet Explorer 6 on a PC. In this day and age, the Web stretches across a broad range of devices, including mobile phones, TVs, handheld PCs and Macs, even fridges. So, our websites could be rendered in any number of ways.

By aiming for uniformity across browsers, not only are you not future-proofing your project, but you are making it less accessible.

W3C Validation

validation

Validation is a tool to guide us, not a religion to blindly follow. For more information on this, Jeffery Way has written a great article titled ““But It Doesn’t Validate1.”

A website that validates is not necessarily accessible to users and does not necessarily function well across browsers. We must not mistake validation for accessibility (as defined by the WAI2) or usability (as defined by the UK’s Disability Discrimination Act).

Google states that validation has no effect on its ranking system. It does partly rank websites based on how accessible and usable they are across a variety of browsers and devices. See Matt Cutt’s response3 to a user’s question about why their website doesn’t validate.

How We Develop Today

how we work today

  • We use HTML5 and CSS3 to make our websites more device-friendly, accessible and usable. These standards enable our websites to be accessed on browsers that extend far beyond just PCs and Macs.
  • The development process has accelerated, which helps us complete projects faster and to a higher standard.
  • Minor changes are not as time-consuming, which reduces development time and saves the client money.
  • By designing and developing to the capabilities of the best browsers, our websites become more future-proof.
  • This method speeds up development time and decreases costs.

Content Is The Priority

pixel perfection

The most important principles to follow are:

  1. Accessibility
    Every website should be developed with clean HTML that can be read by any device. This enables the content to be available to all browsers and devices.
  2. Usability
    Usable information is also a high priority. If a website has been accessed but is not useable on the browser or device, then it serves no purpose (and this might even affect its ranking on Google).

The Differences Between Browsers

browser differences

The above screenshots show how the user experience can differ between advanced and less capable browsers and devices. The four screenshots break down as follows:

  1. Internet Explorer 6, screen readers, browsers and devices with no CSS support.
  2. Older versions of browsers, such as Internet Explorer 7-8, Firefox 2, Chrome, Opera and Safari.
  3. All current modern browsers, such as Firefox 3.6, Chrome, Opera and Safari.
  4. CSS 3-D animation is supported only in Safari at the moment, but will be in upcoming versions of Firefox and Chrome due for release in 2011.

Adaptive Design

adaptive design

Adaptive design entails building your website slightly differently and increasing the development time. You would build the website with fluid widths so that the experience is different depending on the screen size of the user’s device. This kind of development is specialized and tailors the design to particular screen sizes, from smartphones and tablets to widescreen PCs and Macs. Some of the main size categories out there are:

  1. Smartphones;
  2. iPad in portrait orientation, other tablets and small-screen computers;
  3. iPad in landscape orientation, and PC and Macs with an average display width of 1024 pixels;
  4. Widescreen displays.

Summing Up

To put it simply, we work this way in order to make our content available to everyone and to future-proof our websites. You can find some statistics4 that show browser usage and tendencies across the board.

Mobile usage for June 2010:

Opera iPhone Nokia iPod Touch Blackberry Android
26.35% 18.05% 15.84% 8.69% 14.41% 6.69%

We see a steady decline in IE users and a growing market for other browsers and devices.

Introducing HTML5 And CSS3 To Your Clients

The point of all this is to help our ordinary clients understand why we are changing the way we do things, so that they are not afraid of the changes. I am already working in this way, and I’ve found that as long as you are open and honest with clients from the start, they’ll respond positively to these new ways of working.

Download This Presentation

Credits

I’d like to thank the following people for letting me use their work for my visuals:

Further Reading

(al)

Footnotes

  1. 1 http://net.tutsplus.com/articles/general/but-it-doesnt-validate/
  2. 2 http://www.w3.org/WAI/
  3. 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPBACTS-tyg
  4. 4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
  5. 5 http://www.smashingmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/presentation1.pdf
  6. 6 http://www.weallneedheroes.co.uk/downloads/Presentation.zip
  7. 7 http://trentwalton.com/
  8. 8 http://hardboiledwebdesign.com/
  9. 9 http://www.timbenniks.nl/
  10. 10 http://coding.smashingmagazine.com/2010/06/17/start-using-css3-today-techniques-and-tutorials/
  11. 11 http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2011/07/22/responsive-web-design-techniques-tools-and-design-strategies/

↑ Back to topShare on Twitter

David Martin is an Information Architect, UI Designer, CSS/HTML Builder, Wordpress Developer & Musician. He has been working in web industry for over 12 years. He works for LHM Media a digital marketing agency based in Birmingham, uk. He also tweets from time to time @weallneedheroes if you wish to follow him.

Advertising

Note: Our rating-system has caused errors, so it's disabled at the moment. It will be back the moment the problem has been resolved. We're very sorry. Happy Holidays!

  1. 1

    I guess the computer browser table is wrong. IE and Firefox % are inverted, right?
    Good article nonetheless.

    • 2

      Adrien Lagrange

      July 29, 2011 4:45 am

      These statictics are right for the w3c website.
      However it doesn’t reflect the real worldwide browser statistics.
      I advise http://gs.statcounter.com to get more reliable statistics.

    • 3

      From the research I did Firefox users have taken over IE, also Chrome has taken a massive amount of the market in a very short time. :)

  2. 6

    Great article and I couldn’t agree more.

  3. 8

    Good article, it was nice read!
    But in “The Difference Between Browsers”, at number 3 you left out IE9, which is a modern browser after all.

    • 9

      That would depend on your definition of “modern browser.” While it is considerably better than its predecessors, there are a number of pretty basic things that it’s still completely missing, such as text-shadow, gradients, and SVG filters (things that the others have had complete support for for at least one version), that many would consider required for a browser to be considered “modern.”

  4. 10

    The Browser-table says nothing. The versions must be included to tell us anything needfull.

    But the article itself is absoluty usefull :-)

    • 11

      I completely agree that legcay versions of Internet Explorer are holding back web development! and I think there are a number of factors to blame for this. I agree that many corporations are still stuck on IE6 because of compatibility issues with their existing apps if they migrate, but this is why I think developers should be doing a lot more! Developers should be focusing on making their web apps compatible with the latest versions of browsers, rather than devoting so much time to ensuring backwards compatibility with a browser that’s a decade old now!But ultimately, I think Microsoft has a lot to answer for! They’ve committed to continue support for IE6 until 2014 (to coincide with the end of life of XP). As this is still 3 years away, many corporations and developers are not in any rush to move forward so right now the development of the Internet is really being held back!As a developer, we withdrew support in IE6 for our last year, following other high profile sites that did the same (as you mention). It was a difficult decision to make, but we really want to see the web move forward, especially with all the exciting developments with HTML5, CSS3, and so forth.. so really it was the right decision to take!I actually blogged about this whole IE6 issue recently:

  5. 12

    Was about to say the same, there’s no way Firefox is more popular than IE, no matter how much we want it to be.

    Think IE should take a leaf out of the book of other browsers, like Chrome which self updates.

    • 13

      I think he was seeing this http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp which is not entirely accurate.

    • 14

      IE is only around cause its integrated into the OS … if it weren’t for that simple fact … FF would mop the floor with IE … and anyone who knows anything about browsers knows IE is a web designers reason for drinking …

    • 15

      I find that cnilet involvement is both the most rewarding and challenging part of web design. I try to always complete sections of the website like structure, color schemes, content placement, etc. and then get them involved after every section is completed. Then when I need to make changes (good communication always leads to some changes) I can fix one section, or page, or concept at a time.Good cnilet relationships always revolve around good teaching. You have to teach the cnilets what and why it is you are doing what you are doing.

  6. 16

    I agree they should be pushed, and the world should move on to greet them. The day when almost all web surfers are using browsers that can handle any and all CSS3/HTML5 one can throw at them will be a wonderful day. But, alas, that day is not today. And if you’re going to be even half as anal retentive as most developers were during the XHTML era (primarily regarding properness, strictness, and semantics), then you still can’t ignore browsers like IE6-8. So get ready to use a considerable amount of javascript and xhtml to pad your html5/css3 so everyone can see it (which seems to be what almost all HTML5 sites I see today do), all so you can say you’re using the latest stuff (which, if anything, slows down development and raises costs to clients).

  7. 17

    I agree that it ís time to change. But, we should not leave that to the client’s judgement. I’ve been working as a web designer for a creative agency for 3 years now, and I’ve never heard a client speak about css, html or validation.
    It’s up to the web designers and developers to decide when to use css3 and html5, not up to the clients. Just use CSS3/HTML5 when you make a new website or doing a redesign. That way they don’t feel like they are paying for something they don’t understand. Telling your client they should change their current – and in their eyes perfectly fine – website, because it’s ‘outdated’, is not going to work most of the time. They might think the agency did not do a good job in the first place.

    • 18

      Most of the clients we deal with ask for AA or AAA & needs to be strict HTML. This is the main reason I created this document to help them understand why we develop the way we do & to put to rest all the myths they have heard from other agencies or freelancers that don’t know what they’re talking about.

  8. 19

    It’s clear that webdesign practice has evolved and that we need to design for a number of screens and devices, and I agree with many if not all of the points described in this article. However it’s unclear to me how any of this means “it’s time to use HTML5 now” as you state in the title. As far as I know mobile browsers render XHTML or HTML 4 just fine, no?

    • 20

      HTML 5 is what we should be using, just because XHTML/HTML 4 works doesn’t mean we should not move forward. In my opinion thats like saying IE6 works why should i use Firefox?

  9. 21

    This is a good article, who has the sweet taste of the zeitgeist.
    HTML5 and CSS3 everywhere and all the time. HTML5 and CSS3 for a better world.
    I really, really want to be as optimistic and enthusiast as that, but I couldn’t truly be.
    And maybe because I’m on a side of the fence that don’t allow me to think this way.
    I’m a front-end developer. Not as a freelance, but for an agency.
    I always worked for agencies. So, I don’t choose the clients I will work with, or for…

    Most of the times, we build e-commerce sites, which means, a site to sell and not to stare at.

    That last sentence tells all. We can’t let some people out of the field, or with a bad user experience or with a “site-that-perfectly-works-here-but-not-here-please-change-your-browser”.
    In the e-commerce field, the rules are very different and they leave a very small room for innovation (or you are Nike, and so you can make everything you want).

    For that kind of sites, we can use a bit of HTML5 and a tiny dose of CSS3… but we can’t allow us to experiment. Because, let’s face it, it’s not a standard (we consider it like that), but still an experiment.
    The ground will still moving, and if a simple portfolio or a showcase site will be easy to update, a huge structure won’t.

    This is the (sad) reality for many designers and front-end developers around the world.
    In a way we are like those people whose jobs are actors and who dream to play in The Dark Knight Rises, while the only role they will ever have is for an obscure local shorts :)

    Moreover, I will say that, even if our minds move quickly from an innovation to an another, our clients’ mind is a bit more slower.
    And it’s logical, since our jobs are most of the times black magic to them. And this black magic is our every day life.
    So ok, it’s a good idea to start explaining them HTML5 and CSS3 and the future, but be careful not changing the rules too often.

    To conclude, I will say that this is my vision of the thing as an “employee”. Personnaly, I agree on most points of your article, because I really think that all those new things are good (for us and our clients), if they are used correctly.
    But mind the gap between ideal world and common life…

    • 22

      @Sam

      Excellent web design can’t rely on CSS3 alone. I’ve seen some BAD animations the last couple of weeks or transitions and borders and box-shadows that end up making the design more about CSS3 gimicks then about the Heart and Purpose of the design in the first place. So, I hear you on e-commerce needing to do its job, and that is to sell.

      And … CSS3 can create a much slicker and stimulating environment within which to read or interact or shop. If your e-commerce design works, it’s selling what it needs to sell. If your design works and is using CSS3 tastefully and progressively, you know and I know, that a better looking box of cereal is going to sell more than a generic brand with the same exact ingredients. Might as well make every site, especially forward-looking, forward-feeling e-commerce sites Top Shelf sites too.

      • 23

        I agree with you. That’s what I said here, maybe not clearly :
        “For that kind of sites, we can use a bit of HTML5 and a tiny dose of CSS3… but we can’t allow us to experiment.”

        It’s absolutely true that some well-used (and quite inoffensive) CSS3 properties enhanced your site, and give it something more than the others. Which is a kind of secret weapon.
        But in my opinion, things like animations that mimic flash effects are not useable, as (useful) HTML5 properties only recognized by the very last browser versions (and using polyfills is not an option too, but it’s another debate :) ).

        There is a balance to find (and an internal debate to make) in that special case, between making some steps in the future without losing our goal and our constraints…

        “[…]that end up making the design more about CSS3 gimmicks then about the Heart and Purpose of the design in the first place”
        This is another thing I fear about this HTML/CSS3 wave. That a lot of sites use properties, just to look cool and “modern”, while forgetting ergonomy or basic design rules.
        You know, like when everyone designed their sites on Flash because it was sooooooo cool… but absolutely lame :)

  10. 24

    Good article, it was nice read!

  11. 25

    I think nerding out on HTML5 and CSS3 is mainly an inside-industry affair, that being, only people who get off on hovering over elements to experience the 300ms transition in background-color are going to care. Clients are too, but not to as big a degree.

    What they will want is for there site to work and do its function on every single device and browser that’s out there, and more importantly, the top tiered one that they’re particular base is using. So, if you’ve got a bunch of car mechanics who have 2008 Dell’s at the shop running IE6 and you’re all hyped up on CSS3 having only designed and coded for the iPhone owners who are getting their cars fixed at this garage, you’re alienating the mechanics in favor of the iPhoners.

    Our job as to make the web as accessible to everyone as possible (within reason), to future-proof our sites (for practicality), to inspire each other with what’s possible in design and communication, and move whatever it is that we’re trying to move.

    If we do that, and our clients win, we win. If we use HTML5 and CSS3 in the process, we win even bigger.

    I LOVE what’s emerging in the web today. Progressive enhancement is like Leave No Child Left Behind except with this giant caveat– for all those users out there with modern viewing capabilities, here’s a show you’ll never forget!

  12. 26

    Excellent article!

  13. 27

    Dear David this was a great article. One question: Can we use the Presentation PDF on our website and/or can we even turn it into a HTML version?

    • 28

      Yes of course & if you wouldn’t mind could you add a creditto me? Only if it’s none client facing of course.

      I added the indesign file so anyone could take what I created & adapt it to there company.

      Cheers

  14. 29

    FANTASTIC !

  15. 30

    Just a reminder that in the UK, the Disability Discrimination Act has been largely replaced by the Equality Act 2010.

  16. 31

    First off, great article–I think there are some interesting ideas in here, and you have articulated them plainly.

    I believe the essence of your argument is dead on. The important thing is that a website works–and works well!–regardless of the device that is used to access it. Therefore, communicating to clients that the hallmark of a “good” site is not pixel perfection in IE6, but rather that their customers can access the site in IE6, or an iPhone, or fill_in_the_blank.

    If this message can be bought into, then there is a tremendous space for giving users who use the newest and best browsers/devices the very best and coolest experience, while not neglecting the functional access of users on other devices. And I think that is an easy thing to sell. I think most clients would see the greater benefit of devoting time and energy to improving and broadening accessibility over making sure that the website in IE6 looks like newest version of Chrome.

  17. 32

    This is hilarious.

    Even before CSS was introduced over a decade ago, the mantra for good web design was “separation of content and presentation”. At that time it was through the use of semantic tagging (“strong” vs “b”). And we were preaching that browsers would have some variation in presentation, but that it was the content that mattered.

    But clients wanted it to look how they wanted.

    Then in 1996 CSS was introduced and in 2000 IE for Mac was the best browser for CSS support. We finally had a better abstraction language to separate content and presentation. And we were preaching that “graceful degradation” of CSS mean that browsers would have some variation in presentation, but that it was the content that mattered.

    But clients wanted it to look how they wanted.

    In 2002 XHTML started to become all the rage and by 2004 CSS2 was halfway decently supported in browsers, adding better tools for creating well structured code with sophisticated “table-less” layouts.

    And we had heard our clients saying they wanted it to look how they wanted. And we made it happen. By hook or by crook.

    Now HTML5 (or the non-specification with no version numbers living document of HTML) and CSS3 are mostly here. And we’re preaching again that browsers will have some variation in presentation, but that it’s the content that matters.

    And our clients will want it to look how they want.

    • 33

      This is one case were the client isn’t right.

      They pay us to do this because we know what were doing and when explained in the right way 90% of clients are happy to let us lead them.

      If I hired a builder to extend my house, he then told me he would be building it using brick & I said ‘err no thanks I want it made with mud & clay’ they would put me in my place ‘i hope they would’.

      We can’t be scared to tell the client their wrong & if they go down the wrong route it will end up with them paying us or another company to fix it 6 to 12 months later.

      We have to move with the times & how we work always evolves but the content will always be king!

  18. 34

    So all we have to switch to CSS3 and HML.

    • 35

      “So all we have to switch to CSS3 and HML”

      Well no.
      It is your choice NOT to use the latest technology, or even move with the times.

      If you don’t start soon you’ll be left behind and will face a large learning curve simerla to those people back in the day that said CSS would never take over from TABLE layouts!

      We move forward faster when people embrase new technology (like thousands have), not hide from it because it’s the easier option to stick with what we already know.

  19. 36

    I think it’s pretty clear that while CSS3 and HTML5 are fun to play with, they are NOT ready for mainstream integration. Sure on sites that are mainly techy, or have fairly forward leaning audience HTML5 and CSS3 may be viable option. But for everyday use on large sites, with a wide audience, I agree with Sam Mark “we can use a bit of HTML5 and a tiny dose of CSS3″

    Sure we can round some corners, and use flv fallback, but to completely embrace HTML5 and CSS3 (a standard that is yet a standard, and whose syntax can change from release to release) would be a ridiculous idea.

    • 37

      It’s the same as saying every server on the internet should be running the experimental or beta release of their distributions and not the STABLE version

    • 38

      They are ready, at least as you say parts are! If you wait around for everything to be finished you’ll be left behind.

      We have started using HTML5 & CSS3 for our clients and have had no issues yet with any of the projects we have developed this way.

      Some things aren’t ready but a lot are and the only reasons for not using them is the fear of the unknown.

  20. 39

    I really do what to use HTML 5 and CSS3 – As much as I want to use CSS & HTML 5, my client base demands maximum saturation because they sell stuff and I want want the least amount of headaches and the least amount of work to do as possible.

    There is no browser to date that can stomach every single aspect of HTML 5 or CSS3: For instance,only Chrome and Safari can handle CSS3 animations yet those two browsers have less than 25% penetration between the two of them:

    References: “Stat Counter”
    http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201007-201107

    Reference “Find Me By IP”
    http://www.findmebyip.com/litmus

  21. 40

    The purpose of web design is to create websites which work on the widest variety of browsers people use (now and in the future) in the most consistent fashion for the least cost to clients. If you want to ignore client demands for the best ROI, and you want to ignore the fact most people can’t run HTML5, you want to ignore the fact there’s no cross-browser compatibilty, then go create art installations for yourself, but don’t work commercially.
    W3C validation is NOT a guideline you can ignore or a mindless religion, it’s a guarrantee of cross-browser compatibility. People who’ve been in the web since the beginning (I built my first site in 1992) have seen the rush to adopt HTML versions before they were finished in the past. It always works the same way – designers push it because it’s fun, ignoring audience reality and the fact the standard is not finished. They consume unnecessary client funds wasting times trying to shoe-horn their design into multiple versions to handle browser issues. When the standard is finished it’s different from every draft version and most code is obsolete. Browsers then adopt the full standard and everything has to be rewritten.
    Being on the leading edge is no place to work commercially in the web. You need to focus on technology which is stable, which means several years old.
    If you want to do cutting edge stuff, do it on your own time, not your client’s or employers.
    By all means, learn HTML5 now so you can be ready when it is finalised, which will probably take another 2-3 years. Then we’ll wait another year or so for full cross-browser compatibility. Then we’ll wait another year or two until the majority have upgraded their browsers. Come back in 5-7 years and you can do HTML5 commercial work, but not now.

    • 41

      Hi Brandt just to pick up on one thing you have written in your comment:

      “W3C validation is NOT a guideline you can ignore”.

      W3C Validation is useful but they are just guides! Validation means nothing if the code behind the site is not accessable to as many browsers and devices as it can possibly be.

      I was of your oppinion back before i wrote this article but you should read this if you haven’t already “http://net.tutsplus.com/articles/general/but-it-doesnt-validate/” and embrase it.

    • 42

      “most people can’t run HTML5″ – Wrong
      “W3C validation is NOT a guideline you can ignore or a mindless religion, it’s a guarrantee of cross-browser compatibility” – Wrong
      “They consume unnecessary client funds wasting times trying to shoe-horn their design into multiple versions to handle browser issues” – Wrong
      “Browsers then adopt the full standard and everything has to be rewritten” – Wrong
      “Being on the leading edge is no place to work commercially in the web” – Wrong
      “You need to focus on technology which is stable, which means several years old.” – Wrong

      I don’t think I could disagree with more of your points if I tried… are you afraid of learning and adopting new technology?

    • 43

      Agree 100% with you Brandt
      There is a reason new technolgies are termed bleeding edge. It’s a place my clients don’t want to be.

  22. 44

    A lot of the points in the article represent my own thoughts on the issue of HTML5/CSS3 usage on client websites.

    I have to disagree with those that say it’s too early to make use of these technologies. There are many, many benefits to a developer (as well as client) when utilising HTML5/CSS3.

    I’ve personally found that I can cut development time hugely, by making use of CSS3 properties (rounded corners, gradients etc) and HTML5 features (form validation, better semantics etc). Not to mention the greater accessibility HTML5 brings, with the introduction of the ARIA spec.

    The bottom line is, HTML5/CSS3 when used together( and used correctly) can greatly help to improve the workflow of a developer. If the workflow is improved and work-rate therefore increased – Win-win all round, surely?

  23. 45

    So that old website built 5 years ago with html 4, has visual differences across browsers yet validates is now ok? I know that’s not what your saying but my clients dont give a rats about html versions – it validates so its fine.
    Whether its a css drop shadow or an image is not important to them they just want visual consistency like they get from their printers. I think it will be a hard sell to convince many that a new version of html is better if visual consistency is lost.

    • 46

      We are already doing this, you would be surprised how many clients have a good reaction to this when it’s put across in a way they understand. Most client shut off and complain when they have no information for why you have done something. When you explain it in terms they understand, before you do it and are open with them the response in most cases is a positive one.

      After all we are doing this for them because we’re the experts, we need to guide them, not let them guide us.

  24. 47

    Ahem…its great that we have so many options. But contrary to HTML5 only evangelists, there’s more to the web than (simply) scrolling!
    http://www.thefwa.com/article/30-flash-sites-that-school-html5 http://www.thefwa.com/articles

  25. 48

    Well said. I think that a lot of people don’t want to improve their knowledge. Web is evolving. Why not embrace new technologies that helps clients in terms of costs, time and final product? Also some of you said that for small projects HTML5 is fine, but with bigger no. I wouldn’t agree. There are complex HTML5 websites that have a lots of visitors that can be approached from various devices. That is the point. Adaptive web design. It takes a serious strategy, approach and time. In terms of CSS3 why not using because of IE7,8? There are other browsers: Chrome, Mozilla, Safari. My latest clients wanted html5. Just move forward to innovative solutions. HTML5, CSS3, RESPONSIVE DESIGN presents a challenge for all of us and the future of the web. Instead of giving critics, better start learning now! Thanks.

↑ Back to top