Joshua and I have been discussing the future of the prog templates, and we'd like to get some input from the group. The prog templates were originally intended as minimal templates with only structural markup with no style information. They would be used only by programmers when develeloping new features. Because the templates would be minimal, it would be easier for designers of alternate templates to diff changes and incorporate them into their own templates. Now that 3.0 is starting to be used in production environments it's time to ask, are the prog templates still serving that purpose, or are they becoming the defacto default template? The issue is important to me because I believe that in order to provide the right amount of flexibility and detail for good design and usability the templates would have to be expanded: additional markup would have to be added to create the possiblity of one, two, and three-column designs, for instance. Divs would be added for the purpose of controlling layout--divs which have no semantic meaning. This kind of change is at odds with the original intention of the prog templates. If it is agreed that the prog templates should be expanded to allow more flexibility for more complex styling, some discussion would have to follow about the kind of layout scheme we should use. The system I chose for NPL's dev_week opac, for instance, is based on this one: http://www.positioniseverything.net/articles/onetruelayout/appendix/holygrai... It has worked well for us, but includes some extra markup, as I said. If others have a tried-and-true layout that uses less extraneous markup please chime in. What does everyone think? Thanks, Owen -- Web Developer Nelsonville Public Library http://www.athenscounty.lib.oh.us