Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
book.mixu.net
Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
1–10 of 106 posts
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#2another z-index one:
https://philipwalton.com/articles/what-no-one-told-you-about...
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#3Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#4What is the best way to learn css in depth? The official documentation is a little wierd about what is actual and what is not.
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#5written before css grid and css columns? another z-index one: https://philipwalton.com/articles/what-no-one-told-you-about...
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#6Not sure if any extensions or browsers still have that feature?
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#7What is the best way to learn css in depth? The official documentation is a little wierd about what is actual and what is not.
[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS
The former is not meant as a learning resource for new web devs. And the latter (which is neither official nor authoritative) usually has information about the "baseline" support and browser compatibility tables.
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#8What is the best way to learn css in depth? The official documentation is a little wierd about what is actual and what is not.
I also approach writing CSS with the goal of writing as little as possible. Not because I don't like it - I tend to think it gets an unfairly bad rap - but because it teaches you how to more effectively style layouts without layering too many declarations.
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#9Totally aside, but the article reminded me. Does anyone remember when Firefox showed you the stacking context of elements on a web page? It had an exploded 3d view of all layers on a web page. Not sure if any extensions or browsers still have that feature?
Re: Learn CSS layout the pedantic way (2015)
#10What is the best way to learn css in depth? The official documentation is a little wierd about what is actual and what is not.
Heh, off-topic, but this is one of my favourite "EU English"-isms: using actual to mean current.
Completely understandable, given how e.g. the Dutch translation of current is actueel (whereas the translation of actual is daadwerkelijk).
Anyway, maybe this is even helpful if a native speaker is confused :)