Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

twitter.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 163 posts

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#71

Post by kemayo »

oconnor0 wrote: post #68
mrpollo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, like using for icons http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/present/graphics.html#edef-I

Thanks for pointing that out. That seems like an odd design decision. Edit: I wonder what motivated it. "i" for images and no one uses it to italicize text anymore?

We've used for icons before. Main reason we started doing it, I seem to recall, was that we needed some sort of element there to make the spritesheeting work easily, and a lone empty is (a) short, (b) extremely devoid of meaning which might be added to it by browsers/readers, and (c) easy to remember when writing markup as i-for-icon.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#72

Post by idan »

sopooneo wrote: post #64

Yes, Bootstrap is great. Honestly, I love using it. But where are all the people that I used to see screeching about semantic markup? Because this takes things in exactly the opposite direction.

98% of bootstrap's documentation is about usage of the generated bootstrap CSS, which requires all kinds of presentational markup.

There's a solution for that: use the LESS source. Mixin the various bootstrap classes into the styles you write for your clean, semantic markup. It's a nicer way to work, and it permits removal of almost all the presentational "bootstrap" classes from your markup. With some thoughtfully-structured markup, you can even do away with wrapper divs in many instances.

This isn't without some sharp edges—you have to grasp what the various moving pieces of bootstrap do, and what different mixins you must apply to achieve the desired effect, but it's a cleaner/more powerful approach IMO.

To be clear, I'm glad about the CSS-only approach too because it enables non-designers to get over the suck threshold quickly. Using the LESS is more work at first but it pays dividends in the long run.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#73

Post by domgblackwell »

sopooneo wrote: post #64

Yes, Bootstrap is great. Honestly, I love using it. But where are all the people that I used to see screeching about semantic markup? Because this takes things in exactly the opposite direction.

Although - the implementations used in Bootstrap could be translated to a more semantic approach by using SASS or LESS mixins instead of classes. This is the approach used by the Susy grid system included with Compass. I see Bootstrap as a open-sourced library of tested cross-browser solutions to a reasonable set of challenges in modern front-end coding. As such I'm hoping it is possible to port a lot of it to a "semantic markup" way of doing things.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#74

Post by danneu »

dkharrat wrote: post #57

This is awesome! Major improvements since 1.4. Even though the main use case for Bootstrap seems to be for rapid prototyping, any thoughts on using it for a production app (but perhaps custom-themed), instead of rolling a custom design altogether? It seems Bootstrap has matured to the level that it can be used as for most projects with little customizations if any. A lot of what I read in the comments imply that Boot…

Why would you think you can't? Once your app conforms to Bootstrap's markup, you already have a markup/class hierarchy that makes custom styling easy. There's a blog out there that shows Bootstrap sites in the wild and they're customized.

I converted my Bootstrap 2 theme into a dark one: http://i.imgur.com/qm1iA.png

I call it... Darkstrap.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#75

Post by dfischer »

sopooneo wrote: post #64

Yes, Bootstrap is great. Honestly, I love using it. But where are all the people that I used to see screeching about semantic markup? Because this takes things in exactly the opposite direction.

My solution to this is to use @extend from Sass/SCSS as a way to bake that into more semantic structure.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#76

Post by whatusername »

jv22222 wrote: post #56

My only fear is that widespread use of these kind of pre-designed frameworks might create a homogenized web. I understand that you can re-skin but I'm thinking many folks will go with the pre-built look/feel. Even so, this is awesome for getting stuff out quickly. Great job.

Look at Wordpress. We haven't got a homogenized web yet (aside from facebook)

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#77

Post by intranation »

mrpollo wrote: post #70
oconnor0 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for pointing that out. That seems like an odd design decision. Edit: I wonder what motivated it. "i" for images and no one uses it to italicize text anymore?

yeah my best guess is that "i" for "icon", it's a good use, from the w3c "their use is discouraged in favor of style sheets." so I guess it doesn't really hurt no one, but the purists, or am I wrong?

`i` is for "italic", and that quote means that you should be using `font-style` instead of an HTML element to make your text italic.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#78

Post by xmlninja »

mrpollo wrote: post #67
sopooneo wrote: post #64

Yes, Bootstrap is great. Honestly, I love using it. But where are all the people that I used to see screeching about semantic markup? Because this takes things in exactly the opposite direction.

yeah, like using for icons http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/present/graphics.html#edef-I

you dont have to use their icons you know.

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#79

Post by c_t_montgomery »

pdk wrote: post #60

Has anyone compared this to the Skeleton responsive grid? I like that the styling on skeleton is more minimalist, but worry that I'm missing on some features from Bootstrap.

Seeing that the designer/developer of Skeleton (@dhg on twitter) is a designer at Twitter now, I'm sure there will be plenty of mash-ups between Bootstrap and Skeleton.

At least, it gives me something to hack on this weekend :D

Re: Bootstrap 2.0, From Twitter

#80

Post by xnxn »

ericmsimons wrote: post #47
Griever wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious about this as well. I was checking out the 2.0-wip earlier today and all of the button animations remained intact.

Yeah, I saw it just a day or two ago as well and it was still there. I wonder if they're removing effects that aren't compatible across all browsers?

The relevant issue/rationale is here: https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/issues/1229

I'm glad they got rid of it. It made the buttons feel "squishy" and unresponsive.

Post reply on HN