Parts of the site look a bit blurry on a retina :( That's really not the best first impression for this sort of site ...
Same here:
Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
11–20 of 98 posts
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#12This is not a criticism of this project specifically, but I feel like when you come out with a framework like this you should have a big "Why you should use Framework XYZ instead of Boostrap" section somewhere, because this is the main question most people will have.
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it is front paged on HN
I assume Belhor means the UI responsiveness. The :hover transitions are a bit too long for my tastes and it definitely creates a laggy feeling.
Scrolling up and down the page feels a little laggy too (Chrome 24, Win7). Is that a drawback of how the 'responsiveness' is coded?
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#14not impressed
also http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/speed/scrolling/
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#15This is not a criticism of this project specifically, but I feel like when you come out with a framework like this you should have a big "Why you should use Framework XYZ instead of Boostrap" section somewhere, because this is the main question most people will have.
Why I should use Bootstrap?
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#16This is not a criticism of this project specifically, but I feel like when you come out with a framework like this you should have a big "Why you should use Framework XYZ instead of Boostrap" section somewhere, because this is the main question most people will have.
Or, why not contribute to bootstrap instead?
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#17This is not a criticism of this project specifically, but I feel like when you come out with a framework like this you should have a big "Why you should use Framework XYZ instead of Boostrap" section somewhere, because this is the main question most people will have.
>but I feel like when you come out with a framework like this you should have a big "Why you should use Framework XYZ instead of Boostrap" section somewhere
This is true for any product whatsoever, not just a framework.
Answer this question, and make it the headline of your landing page:
If I am your ideal prospect, why should I say yes to you rather than any of your competitors?
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#18given that the site is a showcase for the framework, I find their choice of colours and layouts very unappealing.
Also, yes, I'd like them to answer the question "Why Us" somewhere on their site.
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#19This is not a criticism of this project specifically, but I feel like when you come out with a framework like this you should have a big "Why you should use Framework XYZ instead of Boostrap" section somewhere, because this is the main question most people will have.
May be we need a new layer: a lib to handle different frameworks! like Haxe but for HTML.
Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework
#20Some notes:
As mentioned, one of the first things that should be addressed when you're building a competing framework is what yours offers that the "big boys" don't. I don't really see that; indeed, what I'm first hit with is something that doesn't look as polished as Bootstrap.
As I poke through it, the whole framework looks like an analog to Bootstrap; I have to ask ... why? Is responsive text the only thing not available on Bootstrap?
Also the grid designations of .two.thirds versus .span9 makes me vomit all over myself.