You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I get the classless motivation, but I find that the answer to one extreme is rarely the opposite extreme, but a healthy balance. I hope this is something you'll consider. 🙂
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I don't want to turn holiday.css into Bootstrap/Bulma/whatever. I want to keep the scope small.
Regarding your specific example, I think it would be really hard to create a generic "card" component using a single class that would work well with different use cases. Some might want to put a text header into it, some might want an image header, or an accordion.
So, I would like to leave creating custom components to the consumer of the library.
Perhaps, once I figure out a proper way to support theming (#132), and a proper way to separate "base", "full", and "extended" stylesheets (#84), then maybe I will consider having some advanced components. But I would rather have them made by somebody else :) Perhaps something like third-party "plugins" for holiday.css?
And I'm totally with you on "The dream" example. No need to create classes for every single sub-element, especially when you can use semantic ones.
BTW, you can't have more than one <main> element on a page (unless the other ones are hidden), according to HTML spec.
Cool project! Have you considered a few semantic classes like
card
.I'm not proposing the typical solution where elements are bloated with classes, but instead only use classes when there isn't a native HTML tag.
Typical CSS markup
The dream
I get the classless motivation, but I find that the answer to one extreme is rarely the opposite extreme, but a healthy balance. I hope this is something you'll consider. 🙂
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: