<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Benefits of CSS3 vs JQuery</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/</link>
	<description>Whether you&#039;re a top 20 agency or a brand new start-up, we make wonderful experiences for everyone.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 12:52:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: vincent bons</title>
		<link>http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/comment-page-1/#comment-5215</link>
		<dc:creator>vincent bons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:30:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/?p=940#comment-5215</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[alex is true. the comparison is useless.
the thing is. with jquery you can animate stuff. like fading stuff.
but css3 does this as well. no need for jquery.
you can use jquery if you&#039;re a lazy javascripter.
but for transitions and stuff, jquery becomes useless.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>alex is true. the comparison is useless.<br />
the thing is. with jquery you can animate stuff. like fading stuff.<br />
but css3 does this as well. no need for jquery.<br />
you can use jquery if you&#8217;re a lazy javascripter.<br />
but for transitions and stuff, jquery becomes useless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrea</title>
		<link>http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/comment-page-1/#comment-1859</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 16:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/?p=940#comment-1859</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Agree on all the pros on CSS3, but the fact is that jQuery will just incorporate HTML5 and CSS3, getting an overall improvement in performances, while letting us doing the usual JS magic we are used to.

If fully adopting these technologies, it could drop some of unused code, getting a bit less bloated too.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree on all the pros on CSS3, but the fact is that jQuery will just incorporate HTML5 and CSS3, getting an overall improvement in performances, while letting us doing the usual JS magic we are used to.</p>
<p>If fully adopting these technologies, it could drop some of unused code, getting a bit less bloated too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Aitken</title>
		<link>http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/comment-page-1/#comment-1851</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Aitken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:17:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/?p=940#comment-1851</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fair enough - thanks for taking the time to post.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fair enough &#8211; thanks for taking the time to post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: What!?</title>
		<link>http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/comment-page-1/#comment-1850</link>
		<dc:creator>What!?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:12:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/?p=940#comment-1850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Alex, 

Thanks for the comment, and I agree with most of what you are saying, however I think you&#039;ve slightly misunderstood the post a little. I&#039;m not suggesting that they are the same thing, I am discussing the pros and cons of using Javascript in place of CSS3 whilst it is still being developed.

You say they aren&#039;t alternatives, but when it comes to things like full screen background images, or fancy drop-down menus that use moving HTML elements and opacity etc, then they are.

Good point about Prototype and MooTools though, I&#039;ll slightly reword that sentence.

Chris]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Alex, </p>
<p>Thanks for the comment, and I agree with most of what you are saying, however I think you&#8217;ve slightly misunderstood the post a little. I&#8217;m not suggesting that they are the same thing, I am discussing the pros and cons of using Javascript in place of CSS3 whilst it is still being developed.</p>
<p>You say they aren&#8217;t alternatives, but when it comes to things like full screen background images, or fancy drop-down menus that use moving HTML elements and opacity etc, then they are.</p>
<p>Good point about Prototype and MooTools though, I&#8217;ll slightly reword that sentence.</p>
<p>Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Aitken</title>
		<link>http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/tips/the-benefits-of-css3-vs-jquery/comment-page-1/#comment-1849</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Aitken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:58:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whatcreative.co.uk/blog/?p=940#comment-1849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris, sorry but comparing CSS3 and jQuery seems to me a bit like comparing airplanes and cows. They are not alternatives. While the first is a W3C specification, the second is a framework built on top of a language. It&#039;s true that jQuery (or more accurately, JavaScript) can help plug some CSS browser implementation gaps, but it is mainly concerned with a much different realm than that of css - namely, DOM traversal, event handling, ajax implementations... I&#039;d also point out that MooTools and Prototype have both been around for years and that Prototype actually preceeded jQuery and all other JS frameworks as we know them.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris, sorry but comparing CSS3 and jQuery seems to me a bit like comparing airplanes and cows. They are not alternatives. While the first is a W3C specification, the second is a framework built on top of a language. It&#8217;s true that jQuery (or more accurately, JavaScript) can help plug some CSS browser implementation gaps, but it is mainly concerned with a much different realm than that of css &#8211; namely, DOM traversal, event handling, ajax implementations&#8230; I&#8217;d also point out that MooTools and Prototype have both been around for years and that Prototype actually preceeded jQuery and all other JS frameworks as we know them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 5/23 queries in 0.011 seconds using disk: basic

 Served from: www.whatcreative.co.uk @ 2013-05-21 09:10:51 by W3 Total Cache -->