<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why the class name &#8220;wrapper&#8221; is so common</title>
	<atom:link href="http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/</link>
	<description>You have found Friendly Bit, a web development blog. I focus on client side technologies like CSS, HTML and Javascript. You find my articles below and categories to the right.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 00:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: hillos</title>
		<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/#comment-30570</link>
		<dc:creator>hillos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 16:33:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlybit.com/?p=159#comment-30570</guid>
		<description>now there's a wrapper everywhere :P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>now there&#8217;s a wrapper everywhere :P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/#comment-30569</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 19:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlybit.com/?p=159#comment-30569</guid>
		<description>I think CMS's usually fail at producing quality output because by their nature, CMS's are intended to have low-quality input from untrained users.

Still, I don't understand why CMS's have such horrible CSS support. Maybe it's just in the K12 education CMS's I've worked with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think CMS&#8217;s usually fail at producing quality output because by their nature, CMS&#8217;s are intended to have low-quality input from untrained users.</p>
<p>Still, I don&#8217;t understand why CMS&#8217;s have such horrible CSS support. Maybe it&#8217;s just in the K12 education CMS&#8217;s I&#8217;ve worked with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Olly</title>
		<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/#comment-30568</link>
		<dc:creator>Olly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 14:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlybit.com/?p=159#comment-30568</guid>
		<description>I think the reason is much simpler than that. Fixed-width layouts often need a div to wrap around all the content, wrapper seems like a good name for it.

As for semantics not taking a  hold in the CMS world, that's a whole different problem. The blame lies with CMS vendors, the WYSIWYG editors they use, and the people who implement the products. There's a lot of education that still needs to happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the reason is much simpler than that. Fixed-width layouts often need a div to wrap around all the content, wrapper seems like a good name for it.</p>
<p>As for semantics not taking a  hold in the CMS world, that&#8217;s a whole different problem. The blame lies with CMS vendors, the WYSIWYG editors they use, and the people who implement the products. There&#8217;s a lot of education that still needs to happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emil Stenström</title>
		<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/#comment-30567</link>
		<dc:creator>Emil Stenström</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 07:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlybit.com/?p=159#comment-30567</guid>
		<description>@Rasmus Kaj: Does that mean you're against CMS:es?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Rasmus Kaj: Does that mean you&#8217;re against CMS:es?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rasmus Kaj</title>
		<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/#comment-30566</link>
		<dc:creator>Rasmus Kaj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 22:30:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlybit.com/?p=159#comment-30566</guid>
		<description>If the person creating the design of a site doesn't know anything about the content, I think xe should ask someone.

Design is about communication, and I think the person doing the design should know what kind of information it will be used to communicate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the person creating the design of a site doesn&#8217;t know anything about the content, I think xe should ask someone.</p>
<p>Design is about communication, and I think the person doing the design should know what kind of information it will be used to communicate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Devon</title>
		<link>http://friendlybit.com/html/why-the-class-name-wrapper-is-so-common/#comment-30562</link>
		<dc:creator>Devon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:04:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlybit.com/?p=159#comment-30562</guid>
		<description>This points to another benefit of HTML5, since common class names will become element names (footer, aside, etc), making it a little easier on CMS makers &#38; web developers who use them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This points to another benefit of HTML5, since common class names will become element names (footer, aside, etc), making it a little easier on CMS makers &amp; web developers who use them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
