Sorry, I'm a bit late with this, but I'd add two things to your specs. 1. Specify the doc type you want them to use. I can't tell you the number of times I've had people not use doc types at all. 2. Specify that they must use classes that are a description of the style, not what the style is used for. For example, instead of using <span class="Intro_title">Hello world!</span> They should put <strong class="large_bold">Hello world!</strong>. I find that CSS, especially in a large project with different people using it at different times gets very confusing. So people end up using <span class="Intro_title"> on things that are not an introduction or a title, or they make up a new class, exactly the same as intro_title and your style sheets become unmanageable and redundant. HTH, Tara Cleveland spinhead wrote: > I wrote this last year for the guys who coded our site. We're coming up on a > complete redesign (new VP of Marketing) and I'm interested in your take on > it. My perspective is that I don't have time to do the initial coding, but I > know I'll be maintaining it. I've focused on the things that I've found > difficult or frustrating in the past. > > Any glaringly stupid requirements? Am I missing anything really important? > (The last group claimed this was perfectly acceptable, then delivered > something which was pretty close but didn't work in Netscape, so they blew > away all concept of modular code and copied and pasted 15k chunks into every > page to get the navigation to work; therefore, I don't have a real feel for > whether or not this works in the real world.) > > The best suggestion will be rewarded with a happy face. Like this :) > > Oh; you thought I'd e-mail you a pint or something? > > spinhead > > --------------------------------------- > For unsubscribe and other options, including > the Tip Harvester and archive of TheList go to: > http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !