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

Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

groundwork.sidereel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 98 posts

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#21

Post by riffraff »

przemoc wrote: post #15
sgdesign wrote: post #12

This 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?

the actual sensible question would be "..instead of this", and the answer is clearly "because it's been around much longer, many more people use it already".

Bootstrap is the incumbent so other similar frameworks _must_ explain why they are better, or it's the default choice.

Of course if you actually want to know why you should use a framework like bootstrap then you can just read bootstrap's site.

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#22

Post by MatthewPhillips »

sgdesign wrote: post #12

This 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.

This uses Sass, Bootstrap uses Less.

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#24

Post by taf2 »

tomelders wrote: post #7

Using Safari 6.0.2, clicking on the first input on this page crashes Safari with a speed and efficiency that can only be admired. http://groundwork.sidereel.com/?url=tooltips-js I wish Safari could shut down that quickly when I manually quit. No problem with Chrome.

Just bookmark that and open it to close it

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#25

Post by RutZap »

tomelders wrote: post #7

Using Safari 6.0.2, clicking on the first input on this page crashes Safari with a speed and efficiency that can only be admired. http://groundwork.sidereel.com/?url=tooltips-js I wish Safari could shut down that quickly when I manually quit. No problem with Chrome.

I can confirm that.. it's amazingly fast in its demise :)

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#27

Post by Flenser »

wslh wrote: post #19
sgdesign wrote: post #12

This 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.

In our current project instead of putting the framework's html/css into our codebase I'm outputting as bare bones html as I can with semantic class names on everything and then mapping those classes to the framework using sass mixins/extends/includes.

To make a RWD site I'm having to rewrite a lot of the framework to be mixins instead of classes so that I can use them in @media as SASS doesn't allow @extend in @media any more[1]. What I'd find really useful would be a framework thats entirely built from mixins/partials and outputs no css until you create your own classes that use them.

[1]: https://github.com/nex3/sass/issues/154 Disallow @extend within directives

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#28

Post by a_m0d »

This framework is quite broken on the iPad (in Chrome).

- The dropdown menu doesn't work well. It triggers on hover, but trying to do "hoverintent" on the iPad simply fires the click event on the button, causing the menu to appear briefly before the page navigates. - I can't even scroll at all on the demo pages. Dragging the page (to scroll) just drags the whole tab rather than actually scrolling.

Re: Groundwork - A Responsive HTML5, CSS and JavaScript Framework

#30

Post by jongold »

Not wanting to be too critical, but there's lots of talk about "not wanting to look Bootstrappy" (or to a lesser extent, "Foundationy") — in that without customisation sites using them can look cookie-cutter.

This is ugly - I'd rather see sites using Bootstrap or Foundation than this, however solid the codebase is.

Sorry!

Post reply on HN