- From: GreLI <greli@mail.ru>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:52:00 +0400
- To: "Eric Twilegar" <Eric.Twilegar@onpeak.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
If elements looks different aren't they different? So another class is fully reasonable. If visual changes were made due to document structure then structural pseudo-classes come to scene, e.g. first-child, last-child, nth-of-type, etc. See selectors level 3 section: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/ On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:33:06 +0400, Eric Twilegar <Eric.Twilegar@onpeak.com> wrote: > Those solutions require me to go and change my HTML if I want to then > change the way something looks. > > I'm shooting for more unobtrusive CSS in the same thought process of > unobtrusive JavaScript. > > Most of my DIVs are classed like this. > > <div class="aValue taxRateValue sectionAClass" > ie. generic, specific, > location. > > I don't like to put classes on my HTML that describe what it looks like. > I put classes that describe what it IS and then use CSS to describe what > it looks like. > > If I do something like this > > <div class="aValue bottomlessBorder" > > </div> > > My designer now has to take bottomlessBorder off if he doesn't want it > on one this particular div. Most designers are more than capable of > editing HTML( server side script), but I don't really want them to. > > > In most of these cases we also have a very specific ID on all of our > DIVs ( <div id="" ). So we can put ID level CSS statements in that > override and get around it if we like, but it create lost of noise. > > > This suggestion is largely to help CSS designers apply style sets to > classes. We have a system that is shared between many clients. Different > CSS drives the look and feel. So the classes on the DIVs,etc have to be > fairly static and generic. > > > Thanks, > Eric > > > -----Original Message----- > From: GreLI [mailto:greli@mail.ru] > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 9:21 AM > To: Eric Twilegar > Cc: www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: css block re-use proposal > > You can already do code reuse by at least two ways now: > > 1. You can group selectors with comma: > .someRealClassOnADiv, > .someAnotherRealClassOnADiv { > border-style:solid; > border-width:1px 1px 0; > } > > 2. You can make class with general attributes and enhance it with > additional classes: > .someGenericClass, > { > border-style:solid; > border-width:1px 1px 0; > } > .specificAdditionalClass { > border-color:green; > } > .anotherSpecificAdditionalClass { > border-color:blue; > } > > <div class="someGenericClass specificAdditionalClass"></div> > <div class="someGenericClass anotherSpecificAdditionalClass"></div> > > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:20:20 +0400, Eric Twilegar > <Eric.Twilegar@onpeak.com> wrote: > >> Many times in CSS I find myself copying and pasting the exact block of >> CSS statements from block to block. >> >> It would be nice if in CSS you could reference one block of CSS inside >> of another block. >> >> I would suggest that we could create a block with a name perhaps using >> the $ character to start it. Then refer to it in another block like an >> include so that the CSS lines are copied in. >> >> >> $bottomLessBorderStyleGroup >> { >> border-style:solid; >> >> border-top-width:1px; >> border-left-width:1px; >> border-right-width:1px; >> border-bottom-width:0px; >> } >> >> ..someRealClassOnADiv >> { >> $bottomLessBorderStyleGroup >> } >> >> >> For now I'm implementing something similar by generating the CSS server >> side, but it would be nice to not have to go to a pre-processor. >> >> >> et
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 14:52:39 UTC