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

CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

matklad.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 88 posts

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#21

Post by themafia »

> There isn’t a fully general solution to positioning and sizing GUI boxes.

flexbox. You can literally recreate any fully responsive desktop style GUI with it. You just need to layout your elements the same way you would in a GUI designer like QtCreator or Glade. Which means thinking in terms of divs with flex-grow set on them to get the automatic container expansion you get with "vertical boxes" or "horizontal boxes". These divs will sometimes be empty if you want a simple "expander" box.

Once you have it down you can look at any desktop GUI and just inherently understand how it maps into this flexbox model.

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#22

Post by interstice »

>> So, don’t think “how can I do my layout in a given system”, think instead “what possible layouts are allowed by the system”

Spoken like someone that hasn't been handed designs and expected to 'just figure it out' for a living.

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#24

Post by camillomiller »

Person who hasn’t spent enough time understanding web design feels entitled to make a CSS mark sheet. Most of the “bad” is really “I haven’t worked with this enough and I will judge it from my limited point of view”. What a waste of time

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#27

Post by bazoom42 »

hexasquid wrote: post #8

So many complaints about web technology, where is the replacement? I'd be interested to know if there was the one true layout system that everyone agrees on

Not which works under the same constraints as the web.

But for simpler scenarios (like fixed-sized paper, desktop displays before super-wide screens), you can have both simpler and more precise layout systems.

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#28

Post by HelloNurse »

chrismorgan wrote: post #25
marcomezzavilla wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad: responsive design Uhmmm, ok

Poor choice of words there; it would have been better as “Bad: responsive breakpoints”.

My experience with responsive breakpoints is that they require compromises and therefore it's hard to make a manager commit to them: everything must look perfect, and identical, on every different device that exists, and if it doesn't it's the designer's fault.

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#29

Post by lwilld »

camillomiller wrote: post #24

Person who hasn’t spent enough time understanding web design feels entitled to make a CSS mark sheet. Most of the “bad” is really “I haven’t worked with this enough and I will judge it from my limited point of view”. What a waste of time

> An ersatz CSS tutorial for people who need to style a web page, but aren’t web developers. I am a wrong person to write this kind of thing, as I have neither the time, nor experience.

I'd say this disclaimer at the top speaks for itself!

Re: CSS: Unavoidable Bad Parts

#30

Post by Joker_vD »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #7

I mean, this has a lot of out of date information which I guess is not surprising for someone who says I'm not an expert and don't do production CSS, but it is weird to get the suggestions that are pretty reasonable for 5+ years ago.

You know, this speaks volumes. Layout is a complicated business, sure, but CSS just keeps having monumental shifts in how you're supposed to approach it year after year; it's as if it's done without any overarching theory/vision but merely groping in the dark, trying things and fixes, and seeing what sticks and doesn't suck too horribly (this latter part is optional; remember Yandex's BEM?)
Post reply on HN