? Why are you assuming that I don't know about that.
Actually have you really design practical webapps before? Because your post only have empty pretty words with no substance.
Semantic html tags are just semantic, it is irrelevant for the discussion.
Responsive design is hard, have you ever try to reize your windows and see how your pretty website behaves? Leave aside stupid people thinking you only need to care about phone device (in portrait mode even) and laptop, most people also think 3 or 4 device widths is enough. Sure some smart one already promoted to break the screen by content, not fixed device size, but even that comes with some downsides.
To make a website works decent on all the possible screen sizes is a lot of work, I spent like 4 months updating and fixing my webapp when I first developed it.
Huh, I am sorry my comment seemed to pushed wrong buttons, no need to get all angry here. It appears you projected some emotion or intention into my comment that simply wasn't there. I did not minimize your struggles with my comment.
Granted, out experience level may differ since I read my first book on CSS in ca 2004 as a teenager and have worked with this ever since, so I may have a biased opinion, but come on. That is really no need to become bitter. "See how your pretty website behaves"? Really? Please keep that kind of emotional pettiness out of this website.
I stand by my statement if you have understood CSS it is not hard nowadays to create simple responsive designs. I come from times where you had to center elements in five different ways for all the common browsers out there and true responsiveness was either impossible or required javascript polyfills and weird nesting of (unsemantic) HTML. This is why my sentence about semantic HTML was relevant. Today it is possible to write semantically clean HTML and style it as you need for 99% of the cases. That was not the case in the past for certain designs. Today we do not usually need to create a hundred HTML elements that carry no information and have only relevance for the design. And even if you would need it there are at least ways noe to keep the info relevant for people who have a need for clean semantic HTML, like people with screen readers. Nonetheless, the separation between the roles of HTML and CSS has gotten so much better over the past two decades.
Keep in mind, this discussion tree started out with the discussion whether it is hard to limit text to a width of 60ch. It is not. This can become hard depending on the complexity of your website and the content that mixes with that text (e.g. if you need to break out images that are wider than the text on occasion). But that was not the discussion here. If you have a raw HTML document and you simply need to limit the width of the text body, to a maximum that is dead simple. Any web-browser on any device is capable of displaying a simple HTML page with their browser default template in a way that the user sees the content.
I argued most 90s style layout patterns (e.g. header, navigation on the left, body in the center, footer at the bottom) are not hard to get right, provided you know how to use responsive units and this isn't your first responsive layout. Of course we need to consider how to deal with the width-taking elements on devices that are very narrow (this may require re-arranging or making menus foldable) — that is usually the part that requires the boldest decisions. Other devices like Landscape tablets for example usually don't require a lot of separate work other than adjusting some sizes and ensure the content fits.
If your project is some ultra-flexible thing where the displayed elements are not fixed or predictable, then this can become a hard task, but thst has nothing to so with the CSS and everything with the information it may or may not need to style correctly all at once.
Actually have you really design practical webapps before? Because your post only have empty pretty words with no substance.
Semantic html tags are just semantic, it is irrelevant for the discussion.
Responsive design is hard, have you ever try to reize your windows and see how your pretty website behaves? Leave aside stupid people thinking you only need to care about phone device (in portrait mode even) and laptop, most people also think 3 or 4 device widths is enough. Sure some smart one already promoted to break the screen by content, not fixed device size, but even that comes with some downsides.
To make a website works decent on all the possible screen sizes is a lot of work, I spent like 4 months updating and fixing my webapp when I first developed it.