News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by CalmQuiet on Saturday February 28, 2009 @11:52AM (#498287)
Seems like some useful wisdom, but the presentation is limited by offering only slides with no audio. Worse: no notes. Worse yet: not downloadable. Just not the way I absorb and assess information best. Sorry I couldn't have been in Denver for the presentation...

Plus, I wonder along with a commenter on her blog... how much does her emphasis on grids limit (which of) her recommendations for those of us who use fluid designs?

Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by dotan on Saturday February 28, 2009 @06:07PM (#498573)
If you look at her code (it's pretty short), her grid uses percentage widths for columns and her template defines either a fixed or a liquid layout. And her point that styles should be context-independent (CSS modules like legos, she says somewhere) is useful regardless of what designs you use.
Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by kyochan on Saturday February 28, 2009 @07:44PM (#498640)
What is irony? Using grids to help save time on a project only to discover dozens of competing frameworks each purporting to be better than the other. So you waste time learning how to use a few of them.

If you are like me, you then give up and spend time writing your own framework.

Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by Hexstream on Saturday February 28, 2009 @11:28PM (#498773)
"If you are like me, you then give up and spend time writing your own framework."

... and then release it and claim it's better than the others. I wonder why there are dozens of competing frameworks?...

Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by maxwell on Saturday February 28, 2009 @10:50PM (#498752)
With the corollary of mercilessly stealing good ideas from other frameworks ;)
Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by simianstyle on Sunday March 01, 2009 @02:33AM (#498844)
Each to one's own - it's not like CSS isn't publicly accessible by anybody.
Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by antidaily on Saturday February 28, 2009 @12:13PM (#498300)
Interesting stuff. I think if people just learned to use multiple classes (ie class="box large blue-bg"), they could drastically reduce the size of their css and reuse more styles.
Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by collint on Saturday February 28, 2009 @01:48PM (#498381)
Didn't we just spend a decade or so trying to get everybody to keep their styles OUT of their markup?

I'm all for reusable css components. Personally I'm using http://github.com/chriseppstein/compass/

Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by russell on Saturday February 28, 2009 @02:00PM (#498394)
TP is talking about the use of classes as mixins. One class could style the container and another could style the contents. I use multiple classes to add effects like hove via JavaScript. Hover can be a single CSS description rather than dozens of alternatives such as box and boxhover.
Re:Nicole Sullivan’s Object Oriented CSS by collint on Sunday March 01, 2009 @12:56AM (#498812)
I'm talking about NOT using presentation-specific such as "box" or "blue".

Having class names such as "two-columns blue hoverable" are slightly more convenient but strategically similar to in-line styles.

Keep that presentation/behavior shit out of my content please.

Modularity is not a difficult problem to solve. But overloading your HTML is damned near impossible to dig yourself out of.