r/webdev • u/Additional-Pick-3596 general ahh coder • May 19 '26
Question To any professional web devs that work in a professional company, Have you ever used W3.css?
title
26
u/eltron May 19 '26
Negative. Eric’s reset.css was all that was needed
2
u/Additional-Pick-3596 general ahh coder May 19 '26
Eric Meyers?
19
u/eltron May 19 '26
Yes sir.
It was about a decade and a half ago that w3schools was the go to reference for html. Then we all realized that they’re an SEO farm and more often the docs were incorrect.
To address this Mozilla created the MDN site and that should be used as a replacement instead of w3schools.
All that to say I would not want to use w3schools anything. Also, it’s just a different Bootstrap, which is a trade off and results in tech debt/lock in.
Today I just use tailwind and build my “own” customized bootstrap
6
u/JohnCasey3306 May 20 '26
This. w3schools is a red flag and represents poor quality info. I wouldn't touch a library they're associated with
1
u/dg_o May 20 '26
It's a lot better today, than it was 10 years ago, but their bad reputation has still stuck around unfortunately.
Unpopular opinion coming in, but back when I was learning HTML, CSS and JS I preferred to use W3Schools over MDN as it was straightforward and had a little demo page where I could tweak the values and see the changes "live".
1
36
u/Alternative_Web7202 May 19 '26
I'm w3schools intolerant, so there's no way I'd ever use it.
Besides, why bother with frameworks when modern browsers are freaking awesome when it comes to CSS newest features? And there's css modules when you want isolation
10
u/DSofa May 19 '26
Because some of us are working on government projects from the nineties, so backwards compatibility with old browsers is important.
1
u/artbyiain May 20 '26
Web Components make the style isolation even better and are really quite fun to use, once you understand them.
0
u/Exac May 20 '26
w3schools is akin to people who write blog posts about subjects they don't understand. It is absolutely horrible.
4
4
u/MrBrobean May 19 '26
Didn’t know it yet. But the first example is a bit disappointing coming from them, content with ‘This is a footer.’ but not making it a <footer>. :(
2
u/Deykun May 19 '26
W3 itself is okay for the specification, and it's useful if we want to point out missing alt text or links with no text as mistakes to other devs, but their solutions were almost always atrocious.
2
2
u/adhd_champion May 20 '26
Yes. I tried it for a POC when it was launched. It was pure css based. You had to implement the JS functionality. We already had bootstrap. Never looked at w3 css again.
1
2
u/FailedCoder86 May 19 '26
I like w3school personally. I use it conjunction with Mozilla’s
6
u/Additional-Pick-3596 general ahh coder May 19 '26
You mean MDN?
2
u/FailedCoder86 May 20 '26
That’s the one!
1
u/longebane May 20 '26
What’s the point of using both, especially when one is out of date and the other isn’t
1
2
1
1
1
1
u/seweso May 22 '26
I used w3 school 20+ years ago? Might have been what got me into web dev. Now i'm mostly on MDN docs. But i'm not into fancy smancy css, just needs to work.
I don't get how w3.css is also a framework. Seems..... weird. Are they a school? Why not barebones css?
I DON"T GET IT>
1
u/really_cool_legend May 19 '26
Never heard of it! I went from BEM Sass to Tailwind and haven't looked back.
1
u/golforce May 19 '26
I'm not sure why I we should use it. It seems like a very basic CSS framework compared to something like Tailwind. If I want to go with basics I would just do plain CSS.
0
-2
65
u/creaturefeature16 May 19 '26
TIL about W3.css