heydonworks
Re:Typicons - free-to-use vector icons embedded in a webfont kit
on Tuesday September 04, 2012 @07:07AM (#4474028)
My two icon font sets (a generic set and a complementary set for app designers) have been hinted using Font Squirrel's algorithm. You may find these of some use: http://www.heydonworks.com/article/an-app-icon-font
Re:Classes? Where We’re Going, We Don’t Need Classes (CSS)
on Thursday June 21, 2012 @08:02AM (#4141540)
What is a style "applied directly" to an element if not a class? It's written on the element itself.
'Classitis' is certainly not a concern for parsers because they do not know it is going on. Then again, that's my point.
Re:Classes? Where We’re Going, We Don’t Need Classes (CSS)
on Thursday June 21, 2012 @07:59AM (#4141531)
Read my comments for the original article carefully. Projects are made easier to maintain by foregoing classes.
Element names belong to a shared lexicon which all developers and sufficiently up-to-date parsers understand. Classes are invented per project. They are a superimposition. They muddy the water.
Re:Classes? Where We’re Going, We Don’t Need Classes (CSS)
on Thursday June 21, 2012 @07:54AM (#4141513)
Ancestry driven selectors are the essence of CSS. Classes are a cludge.
Re:Classes? Where We’re Going, We Don’t Need Classes (CSS)
on Thursday June 21, 2012 @07:53AM (#4141510)
It's not my website.
Re:Classes? Where We’re Going, We Don’t Need Classes (CSS)
on Thursday June 21, 2012 @07:52AM (#4141507)
When the HTML structure changes, the CSS changes in accordance. That is what is supposed to happen. You do not understand the technology.
Re:Classes? Where We’re Going, We Don’t Need Classes (CSS)
on Thursday June 21, 2012 @07:50AM (#4141498)
HTML itself is scalable and my method is sympathetic to HTML. Scalability is a non-issue.