If you use responsive CSS, what am I missing?
Responsive is about responding to container characteristics, instead of relying on the assumption that a certain known device has certain characteristics. Even with responsive, the rabbit hole goes waaay down, but at least you're avoiding the ghetto effect of "supporting" a set list of circumstances.
* Resizing your browser window.
* Changing font-size for accessibility (Ctrl+, Ctrl-)
* Moving your browser between multiple screens
If responsive was server-side, each of these scenarios would cause a page reload in order to accomodate the adjusted layout.
Responsive design doesn't just mean CSS media queries. It more commonly means using floating div/ul instead of tables for layout.
I love responsive design for exactly this. I often have small or large browser windows, and being able to choose instead of being constrained by fixed-width sites is great.
With the client side solutions, like responsive CSS, you're serving one cached, distributed, minified set of data to every client.
Also only sending the needed CSS for mobile browsers makes it that much faster.
(Resize your window and you'll see how everything re-aligns for desktops, tablets, and smartphones)
I chose responsive css because I can code it once, and it'll work on all devices. No bloat, no separate versions to maintain. Why wouldn't you want that? Especially with more and more consumers buying mobile and tablet devices. You increase your potential audience with a few lines of css code. Why do it through server-side code and have seperate versions to maintain during each and every update? As long as you plan ahead, your design can be responsive with literally a few lines of css code.
I think the killer app is really an IB-for-the-web that plugs into Rails/Django/Symphony/etc so you can start building a web app visually, without sacrificing code quality.
This is a far-off idea, but it would be cool if you had support for various frameworks and could plug into a git repo to map the view data into the templates you're outputting. That way I could continue to use your product for the full lifecycle of development.
Right now I write everything in HTML/CSS by hand and poke around with Firebug to do anything visual with it. I'd love a live-edited version of my view templates with a visual editor like this that generates high-quality code. I would pay a sizable amount of money for such a service.
Being a seasoned developer, front, middle and back end, I find this an interesting product, but something that I would likely never use more than "playing around". I'm not trying to troll here, I'm legitimately curious if anyone else feels this way.
Edit: I did sign up for an invite over a month ago, and I am legit excited to give it a go.
Given the predecessors to divshot in the WYSIWYG world, expect many developers and designers to be extremely open minded, yet very skeptical.
We hope to be a tool that developers will use to rapidly prototype an interface at the beginning stages of an application and then continue to use it to experiment or quickly build new functionality throughout the app lifecycle. Hope that answers your question.
I am the founder of Jetstrap (http://jetstrap.com/) and we've built an interface builder for Bootstrap as well, so we are definitely in the same space.
You should let more people try it even if it means stumbling upon a few bugs than to turn away people who are genuinely interested in trying.
I'm interested in this type of app, as I've built a design prototyping tool called Edit Room, that also creates production-ready HTML and CSS from visual design tools. http://www.edit-room.com/
Aside from some empty class attributes and extra div wrappers, the markup is really close to what I'd write by hand. Great work with the export!
EDIT: Oh, sorry - this isn't the same output as mbleigh posted. Mine is the tutorial page from Divshot when you first log in.
* .navbar is for positioning/sizing.
* .navbar-inner is required for the gradient because `overflow: visible;` is not respected by IE when `filter` is present.
* .container is for centering the content within the navbar
No idea what .navbar-content is—that's not part of the Bootstrap navbar component. We also use a `ul.nav`, not `div.nav`.
So, close to the core, but not 100%.
Obviously we're HUGE fans of Bootstrap over at Divshot :)
I should have also said I think Divshot is pretty cool, even if I didn't like how many nested divs I saw.
I see you guys are associated with Intridea; any chance we can claim this as another DC startup? DC needs all the buzz we can get =)
This needs to be downloadable and embeddable in a private product (like a CKeditor), otherwise i'd never use it.
My apps cannot have third party services that it relies on. that would give too much problems with our own SLA's.
If the SAS goes down, you are responsible.
Second: my stuff needs to be able work offline (at least o some degree) :)
Secondly, we definitely want to support offline capabilities (as a web app still, but it's very possible) and the ability to safely store all of your work :)
Question: do you guys support custom Bootstrap themes?
(Oh, and I wouldn't turn down an invite. The email I signed up with is in my profile.)
Edit: Either you saw me or I just got lucky. Thanks a bunch! I'll be sure to share feedback (even if it's just saying good job). :)
I will never "sign in" to use a dev tool and I'm certainly not alone.
Desktop/downloadable version is on the horizon but not our first focus.
I'm glad to hear that a downloadable version is on the horizon though! Thank You.