How is "monitoring email, filtering content, or even blocking access to sites" not bad?
CISPA would allow the government, companies and ISPs to have potential access to your private information, all in the name of "Cybersecurity". Please tell me how that isn't bad.
It's only going to be used when its appropriate and when the circumstances call for it. I'm sorry you're misinformed in that you perceive this as a surveillance bill when you have little to no actual knowledge on the topic, but I'd like to reassure you, it's not SOPA, it's not PIPA, and in all likelihood, it doesn't concern you.
This is a surveillance bill packed with purposefully vague language, and I attended a Town Hall with House Intelligence supporters of the bill that defended the need for its vague language - while telling the room of engineers, founders, journalists and security professionals that it would help defend the US against China and that we need the bill to protect us from hackers that do infringement. They actually said this.
The room was flummoxed. But besides that fact that the people that created and support the bill can't explain the difference between an ISP and a server, I'd like to encourage you to look at what this bill does: allows Homeland Security to obtain all the data on an individual and intercept - and alter or stop - communications of anyone they suspect of "disrupting" a network. And no, there is no concrete definition of network. In addition, it looks tailor-made to go after individuals that publish security bugs or exploits as a means to get these issues addressed.
The bill is also designed to protect companies that play ball with Homeland Security, effectively undoing decades of privacy laws. There is nothing to protect individuals, consumers, or users.
This is a serious problem. There are dozens of alarming articles from respected media sources, plentiful online campaigns to stop CISPA, activism by the EFF and Center for Democracy and Technology, attacks on pro-CISPA companies by Anonymous, protests by the ACLU and Free Press - and 3/4 of a million people have signed a petition to stop it.
I don't like it too much. It's still based on designing for desktop first.
I prefer the ones that use a mobile first approach, which is more future-proof and is supported on more devices.
Also, another thing to consider is fluid-width vs fixed-width. Fluid width layouts are harder, but much more future proof. The mobile device landscape changes fast, and there are lots of sizes to design for. A fluid-width website would be much better in this case.
Some of these are Gridless[1], HTML5 Boilerplate[2] and 320 and Up[3].
I know that you already have HTML5 Boilerplate linked, but it should be noted that there's a separate boilerplate page for mobile (http://html5boilerplate.com/mobile/).
Getskeleton. It's not Mobile First, it's not Fluid, and it messes with the default styling for things like buttons and forms. jQuery tabs and button colouring are very unnecessary to serve up as a base. Getting work done with it's grid system was an actual pleasure though. All you have to say is I want this to be class="five columns" to get things going as these things are pre-defined for you.
320andup takes the best parts from Boilerplate, Mobile Boilerplate as well as the Less Framework for it's grid design and typography. It's fluid and mobile first. To get going with it's grid system however, is actually a pain as it's not pre-defined for you. You'll have to perform some calculations for each media query to get a proper grid going.
Grid systems are great, but not in the way they're being used today - with lots presentational of classes and ids in the markup.
Are we going back to the days of tables for layout? Look, classes like span-x, grid-y, append-x describe only the presentation of the content. I thought HTML was meant to describe structure, not layout.
Grid systems are destroying the semantic web.
EDIT:
Other classes-littered systems aren't any better (OOCSS, I'm looking at you).
You're right, Gridless is not really the best name for this boilerplate, but I'm not good in choosing names :(
The problem with grid systems is that they include classnames and ids which should be unique to each project. You can still use grids, but please don't use span-x classes, customize the classnames and ids to suit to your project. And doing that isn't impossible or extremely hard, there are a lot of tools out there for that: Sass/Compass, LESS, Blueprint's compress.rb script etc.
1. Respond.js is not in the footer, it is inside the <head> tag. See here: https://github.com/thatcoolguy/gridless-boilerplate/blob/mas...
2. HTML5's syntax is not very strict, but I prefer closing void elements because I think it improves readability.
3. I chose not to add any responsive image style by default because of IE problems and Windows' rendering. I'm thinking of adding that soon.
The source formatting kinda threw me off with the entire head being tabbed and the empty body, maybe add a little dummy HTML inside the body like the H5BP?
Thanks :) I really think responsive web design and one web is the future of web design. There are some situations where a specific mobile website will be needed, but in the (near) future these will be very rare IMHO.
If you have any cool ideas let me know with a pull request or something.
How is "monitoring email, filtering content, or even blocking access to sites" not bad?
CISPA would allow the government, companies and ISPs to have potential access to your private information, all in the name of "Cybersecurity". Please tell me how that isn't bad.