The idea is that it's the demise of CSS as the primary language used to style webpages. CSS would still be used as a compile target, but most people would write in higher-level languages like Sass or its descendants.
"Demise" here is probably too strong -- a better word might be "waning".
First off, "most people" won't be using Sass instead of writing CSS directly, any time soon.
Sass hasn't really been picked up at all in the design community (who are the primary users of CSS), it's a programmer's solution to a programmer's problem — the designers' point of view seems to be that Sass doesn't solve any of their problems, it only adds complexity.
Now, I like Sass just fine, but this isn't about me, this is about the retarded "idea" that Sass would somehow spell CSS's "demise" (and that's assuming we completely ignore that Sass produces CSS — the very thing which demise it is supposed to cause).
Sass is definitely not targeted at programmers, and it certainly doesn't just solve "a programmer's problem". As one of the users (a designer, incidentally) put it recently on the mailing list: Sass is for people who write CSS. This includes designers, programmers, and anyone in between. It has users from everywhere on this continuum who love it.
Doesn't matter who it's "targeted" for or what the intentions were — the fact of the matter is that Sass (and basically any other programming language designed to make html/css "better") is not popular in the design community. You can argue with this as much as you like, but when you are done, the cold harsh reality will still be that designers in general don't like programming.
This should not puzzle you, nor the people behind Sass. If designers liked programming they would be programmers.
<i>"If designers liked programming they would be programmers."</i><br />
Amen. Having to express a visual idea in code is about as fun as it would be to have to draw your program and have a compiler turn it into code. If web designers could just draw their beautiful designs and have that magically turn into code, they'd love it. Search the web for services that claim to do just that, and you'll see there's plenty of demand. (I have no idea if those services work.)
It's also a matter of empirical fact that the people who use Sass now are a mix of designers and developers. No, Sass isn't used by most designers. Nor is it used by most programmers. But of the people who use Sass, many of them are designers, and that proportion is growing.
Writing Sass is not programming. Most of the time it doesn't feel like programming, and the future goals for it intend to make it feel even less like programming.
I agree completely that if designers liked programming, they would be programmers. I made the same argument myself on the Compass mailing list the other day, defending a design decision made to make the language easier for designers.
Designers don't like programming? Most web designers I know want to know more about programming and jump at the opportunity to learn. Can you provide references or articles to back up your assertion?
In my opinion Web design requires a very similar skill set. Debugging CSS/HTML takes a programmer's mindset. It is not that difficult for most designers to make that jump. Many of them have picked up Javascript just fine.
Web designers? Again, to be good at web design you have to develop many of the same skills as programmers. Debugging CSS/HTML is about the same as debugging code.
Debugging a turing-complete full-fledged programming language is the same as debugging markup? Interesting.
I thought the whole point of Sass, the topic of this discussion, was to introduce more powerful programming concepts to CSS?
So which is it, is CSS already as powerful a tool as a programming language thus making Sass completely useless, or does it lack the capabilities of a real programming language, thus making it much easier for designers to use with proficiency?
However, when you are dealing with CSS related bugs in browsers a high level of determination and problem solving ability is required to get to the bottom of each bug. The same kind of determination is required to debug Ruby or Java or any other programming language.
So the jump from competent web designer to programmer is not as far as you might think. They actually require a similar skillset.
Programming is a left-brain endeavor, designing utilizes the right side of the brain. Enjoying one of these tasks does not mean you enjoy the other, and certainly not that you're any good at it.
The reality is that most designers aren't also proficient programmers. And most programmers aren't also proficient designers. This is the cold hard truth that your Sass-pushing zealotry cannot overcome.
Most designers simply aren't keen to learn to program, because the two things are drastically different things.
"Programming is a left-brain endeavor, designing utilizes the right side of the brain."
Sorry, that's a myth. Both engage both sides of the brain. Most of what we do involves both sides of the brain. There are plenty of books around busting the myth that 'some people are left brain and some people are right brained'. Programming involves much of what is associated with 'right brain thinking': leaps of intuition, random thoughts, synthesis, looking at the bigger picture. While 'designing' (by which I take you to mean 'aesthetic design'?) involves much of what is associated with 'left brain thinking': analytical, objective, rational, logic.
What many folk do not realise is that 'design' is mostly something technical that can be learned. It's a set of rules, guidelines, processes and techniques that can be taught and practised. It's not some magical, right-brain, talent you're born with, it is something that is learned, practised and honed.
Sass is, in my experience, no harder to learn than HTML or CSS. Much easier, in fact if you already know CSS. It's nowhere near as complex as, say, Javascript or PHP, which most web designers seem to be able to handle to some degree. If a web designer (as in someone who specialises in HTML, CSS, graphic design, typography, IA) finds it too hard or complex, they either need to practice more, or find another career, because they're going to be redundant pretty soon as CSS and HTML get more complex with the transition to HTML5 and CSS3.
I don't seem to be making any headway with you on this, so this will probably be my last reply on this thread. But I'm speaking as a professional web designer that has a programming background. I see a lot of correlation between the two.
If we were talking strictly design (as in art) your point would hold a little more weight with me, but we are talking about web design. The skills that are required here are not that different from the skills that are required by a programmer. One is very visual it is true, but both require strong troubleshooting skills.
I'm not sure about the whole left/right brain thing. I'm speaking from my experience of what it takes to be a good web designer.
Is programming strictly a right brain activity? I hear a lot of talk about beauty and design in programming circles today. Clearly it is not all cold crisp logic. You aspire towards beauty and function just as much as designers do.
I know precisely what you mean. I'm just like you, well, almost. I'm a programmer who started in design. But we are exceptions — we are not the norm.
The norm is that programmers like to program and designers like to design. Most programmers suck at design, and most designers hate programming.
Sass is great for the relatively few of us who actually like to do both. But we are exceptions, not the norm, which is why Sass won't spell CSS's "demise" any time soon: most people who write CSS don't like to and don't want to program.
This is exactly why you should never use your personal experience as an indicator of what the norm is. Instead you should observe the world — and in it designers design and programmers program, only rarely does one person enjoy both.
And what are you using? I have observed the world and my observations about web designers are completely different.
I have asked before for references or articles supporting your point of view and you have not posted anything. @charlesr posted some excellent links below. Where is the evidence that supports your perspective?
Most of the benefit of Sass lies in variables, mixins, and nesting. If there are any programming constructs, they're usually in the background, in library code. When there's debugging to be done, it's the same sort that's done for CSS: touching up styles and so forth. And in many ways Sass makes that sort of debugging much easier.
If some putatively "creative" person has taken the effort to learn HTML and CSS, then they're already working in an area which to them may as well be programming -- odd as that may sound to an actual programmer. (And besides, isn't a significant portion of jQuery's audience comprised of web designers? What does that tell you?)
I find it hard to believe that anyone who has worked with CSS on a regular basis would be intimidated by Sass. As the article makes quite clear, it's conceptually simple and provides obvious maintainability advantages. If anything, it subtracts rather than adds complexity.
> I find it hard to believe that anyone who has worked with CSS on a regular basis would be intimidated by Sass.
Would it be hard to believe still if person after person told you so flat out? Because this is the primary reason people say "no thanks" to Sass (and all other html/css empowering macro languages, etc).
Well, except they don't use the word "intimidated", they say that they don't need html/css to get any more complicated, it's fine as it is.
"except they don't use the word "intimidated", they say that they don't need html/css to get any more complicated, it's fine as it is."
I don't know who you've been observing, but in my experience as a web designer, with a bit over 15 years in the industry, is that web designers are constantly moaning about the limitations of HTML and CSS and hate the slow pace of change (or, to be more accurate, the slow pace of the demise of the IE browsers). They're also hungry to learn more and push the boundaries of current knowledge and practise. You only have to look at the coding section of Smashing Magazine, the most popular web design site online, to see that web designers are in no way the sort who are going to be intimidated or uninterested in Sass.
In fact, the debate regarding the evolution of CSS on, and my impression is that there is serious pressure on CSS to change and evolve, judging by the comments here:
