Yeah.. we actually do something similar to what you were saying (we have globalstyles.css). It's good to hear that people don't have problems with my method 2 because I am really liking it. It seems like it has a bunch of benefits in the long-run. I just wanted to make sure ahead of time that I wasn't going to be digging my own hole!!
Thanks! Mike Peach Lynda L CTR USAF 96 CG/SCTA wrote: > Whether #2 is better than #1, I don't know. But I can by experience say > that the method above will work well for you if you are maintain > multiple sites that must retain a similar look, feel, and navigation. > > Also a benefit we didn't know when we started this method, it has > naturally implemented a "process" of change. In other words, things > can't just be PUT into main.css. It has to be carefully considered as to > whether all the sites can or could need this and would USE it the same > way. Sometimes it takes a bit longer to implement but again, the end > result is goodness all the way around. > > An additional benefit is for the programmer developer. They can move > from one project to another and work the programming issues without > worrying the "display" issues. What works in one of these sites will > work in the next. When it doesn't -- that's when I get involved and > additions are done in site.css. Or on some occasions ... Yep, an error > in main.css which got rectified across all the sites. > > My 2 cents -- FWIW. > Lynda Peach > ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
