Current status of the Ning Platform is always available on the Ning Status Blog.

Forum

NC for Hire

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CSS4

There has never been a CSS4. There will never be a CSS4. CSS4 is not a thing that exists.

The term "CSS3" refers to everything published after CSS 2.1.
CSS is on its last version as a language as a whole, so it would be appropriate to just drop the number entirely and refer to everything from now on as just "CSS".

"But", you might object, "I saw things like CSS4 Images, or Selectors 4! Aren't they part of CSS4?".

No. As I just said, there is no CSS4.

I recently was contacted by someone needing help on their network who explained to me that the 'other guy they were talking to' promised to make their site CSS4 compatible.  Then they asked me when CSS4 was going to be available.  So, here is your answer the next time a swindler tries to take your money while trying to promise you the world.  

Actually, promising you the world would be better because the world actually exists.  CSS4 doesn't.  Just fair warning.

You need to be a member of Ning Creators Network to add comments!

Join Ning Creators Network

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets#CSS_4

    http://www.w3.org/TR/selectors4/

    Still, someone promising to make a site CSS4 compatible is silly (right now).

    • NC for Hire

      While trying to finish CSS 2.1, the CSSWG realized that big monolithic "versions" weren't any good. They were difficult to maintain, and slow to develop.

      Instead, they decided to split up the CSS language into a bunch of independent modules. Each module can level up independently, and contains only a smallish set of features, so it's harder for a large set of features to be slowed down by a single stubborn feature.

      Some of our modules start out at level 3, if they extend something from CSS2.1. Others start out at level 1, if they're something new (for example, Flexbox). However, the level that a module is at has no correlation with what version of CSS it's in. They're all CSS3 (or just CSS), regardless of what level they're at.

      Our URLs don't help the matter much, of course. We use URLs with things like css4-backgrounds in them, which totally sounds like CSS4.  All that means is that it's CSS Background & Borders Level 4, which is implicitly part of CSS3 (or just CSS).

      So, now you know. There's no such thing as CSS4. There is only CSS, and each module can level up independently. Pass it on!

      • Ok, so you are quoting one guy who is seemingly arguing semantics http://www.xanthir.com/b4Ko0

        However, if I look at w3c, I see mention of CSS 1, CSS 2.1, Selectors Level 3 and Selectors Level 4. So are you going to say that anyone who says "CSS3 compatible" is a swindler also? Its semantics really, and I think its a little over the top to accuse someone of being a swindler because they called something CSS4 instead of "Selectors Level 4."

        • NC for Hire

          i never accused anyone directly of being a swindler and yes as the link above describes, there is a difference.  I am constantly trying to help NCs who more often than not have little knowledge of web development sift through the lies that some people tell them to make a buck.  that is all.  i appreciate your feedback as it is equally helpful for trying to 'turn a light on' in the mind of NCs who believe anything they are told when they need help.  And btw, the guy I am quoting is well respected and knows what he is talking about.  I believe you know what you are doing as well Ron and value your input.  Please feel free to inject anything else you may know related to this subject for my own edification as well as that of others..

          Thanks Ron..

          • No problem, and thanks for not taking me the wrong way - For a technical IRC chatroom semantics argument, the author is correct. But the point I'm trying to make is that developers inappropriately use terms all the time, and it doesn't necessarily mean they don't know what they are doing or are trying to mislead anyone. 

            That being said, I think the important part that we both neglected to mention in this discussion is that "CSS4 compatible" or even "CSS3 compatible" are ambiguous terms that should raise eyebrows for website owners for a completely different reason. Unless the term means that they aren't using any deprecated features or syntax, that usually means they are using new features. 

            If I put a bunch of features in your site that are from CSS3, that means a large block of your users with older browsers won't be able to see any of the new features, and since many designers don't know what the term "graceful degradation" means, let alone bother implementing it, more often than not, the user will be faced with giant blank spaces or jumbled elements that are not only hideous, but don't even make sense. 

            • NC for Hire

              excellent points!   I see a lot of misuse of the text shadowing and towering, insets, strokes etc all of the time on Ning networks and the truth of the matter is, you have to build for your members.  If you know that the majority of your members are over 50 yrs of age, if it common sense to assume many of them are using outdated browsers and older machines which simply cannot render much of what CSS3 has to offer..

              • It's a classic case of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

                Of course, you could solve this all by adding this to your site:

                <script language="javascript">
                <!--
                if (navigator.appName == "Microsoft Internet Explorer") {
                document.location = "https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/";
                } else {
                document.location = "http://www.domain.com/realhomepage.html";
                }
                // -->
                </script>

                Just kidding of course ;-)

This reply was deleted.

Search the Creators Network

Latest Activity

⚡JFarrow⌁ replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Where is tomorrow's announcement?"
8 minutes ago
Kos replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Nice job Janice!  Yes, I think it's important to contain emails somewhere off site.....for just tho…"
20 minutes ago
Janice D Carter replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Part of my terms is that it is ok to email them and to be fair they ALL have access to one of my em…"
21 minutes ago
Shadow replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Curious so others can know.. as if our site is down and cant reach members we have to lump it .. sh…"
30 minutes ago
Janice D Carter replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Kos,
I no longer export but what I have done is go to using Mailchimp.  I keep an ongoing list of m…"
53 minutes ago
Shadow replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"ours will be 1200.. 600 is fair.. if they go 700 for pro would be also considered fair.. 1200 no..…"
58 minutes ago
Shadow replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"I have always watched for this with my site from seeing what happened to Humanity healng site.. FBI…"
1 hour ago
Garfield Archivist replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"You're welcome. Thanks for taking the time to say so."
1 hour ago
RJ Blanco replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"YEP"
2 hours ago
RJ Blanco replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"ANY UPDATES???"
2 hours ago
George Swann replied to PeruCool's discussion Alternatives to Ning social network
"Ignoring the posts from a few here who have agendas seriously bent on discouragement and discrediti…"
2 hours ago
Hugh replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"I guess with Ning 'tomorrow' never comes."
6 hours ago
Roxanne Furlong replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"I've had troublemakers too, Shadow and have  learned a lot about sociopaths and thieves. I was one…"
6 hours ago
Steve Hargadon replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"That is very funny. Thanks for a good laugh amidst all this stress!"
8 hours ago
LadyHawk replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"I agree... Even with the price increase it's still much cheaper than Jamroom at $720,00 a year."
11 hours ago
LadyHawk replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"PLEASE tell me it's not HP! HP buys companies like this just for the platform technology and then p…"
11 hours ago
Garfield Archivist replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Just found a new issue added to the "Known and Resolved Issues list""
14 hours ago
Shadow replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"also for any new to NING .. be careful of who you make admin to groups as well as members addys can…"
15 hours ago
Shadow replied to The Ning Team's discussion Acquisition Update
"Is this proper to do?wouldnt think so.. as we know those addys are private to our manage tab from o…"
16 hours ago
Edie2k2 replied to PeruCool's discussion Alternatives to Ning social network
"I just noticed that I put my reply in the wrong place. Sorry Janice."
18 hours ago
More…