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

Ink – Interface Kit

ink.sapo.pt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 73 posts

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#31

Post by BSousa »

First of all congratulations or Parabens :)

Nice to see some portuguese projects here.

On a unrelated note, how did this end up on as the musicbox website framework? I worked in this project a while ago (backend and frontend clients only) and had no idea who did the musicbox.sapo.pt frontend.

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#32

Post by JelteF »

rithi wrote: post #25

I have only tried out YUI pure and went back to bootstrap almost immediately. This feels more complete - I particularly like the icon collection.

The icon collection is worth a look for any web project. It's an icon font, so colours and scaling can just be done with css. Very easily integrable with Bootstrap as well, just include the css after the Bootstrap css and it works. (All you might have to test is icons that are a different colour now since they just use the font colour) http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/examples/

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#34

Post by ceejayoz »

chrischen wrote: post #30
ceejayoz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, if your CSS framework doesn't start with "why we're different/better than Bootstrap" I'm pretty much out. I skimmed the docs and see very little here that isn't a direct "Bootstrap does that, we'll do that too".

They support IE7, which I believe Bootstrap 3 has dropped. If you don't do the comparison yourself, you're at risk of losing out.

I'm at risk of losing out if I have to go through 20 pages of documentation and compare line-for-line against Bootstrap rather than the creator going "we decided not to just re-skin Bootstrap primarily for reasons A, B, and C".

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#35

Post by windsurfer »

chrischen wrote: post #30
ceejayoz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, if your CSS framework doesn't start with "why we're different/better than Bootstrap" I'm pretty much out. I skimmed the docs and see very little here that isn't a direct "Bootstrap does that, we'll do that too".

They support IE7, which I believe Bootstrap 3 has dropped. If you don't do the comparison yourself, you're at risk of losing out.

IE7 was last updated over 3 years ago and doesn't even pass Acid2. Only 1.5% of internet users use IE7, and most of those are probably stuck there due to corporate governance rather than choice.

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#36

Post by ditados »

windsurfer wrote: post #33
bstar77 wrote: post #11

I like the idea of having interface "skins", but I honestly could not tell this one apart from Bootstrap. I would love to see more varying interface styles, not another bootstrap clone.

I thought this was built on top of bootstrap.

It's not. It's a completely different codebase.

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#37

Post by ditados »

windsurfer wrote: post #35
chrischen wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They support IE7, which I believe Bootstrap 3 has dropped. If you don't do the comparison yourself, you're at risk of losing out.

IE7 was last updated over 3 years ago and doesn't even pass Acid2. Only 1.5% of internet users use IE7, and most of those are probably stuck there due to corporate governance rather than choice.

Yeah, well, that's a first world problem, clearly. That 1.5% isn't true for their target market.

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#38

Post by rcarmo »

joshuacc wrote: post #28

One thing I like about this is that most of the class names are namespaced (as "ink-something"), unlike most of the other ui frameworks I've looked at. This makes it a lot simpler to integrate into an existing site without accidentally dealing with conflicting class names.

Yeah, that was one of the goals. Ink is supposed to co-exist with existing layouts when you have a legacy to maintain.

Re: Ink – Interface Kit

#39

Post by rcarmo »

BSousa wrote: post #31

First of all congratulations or Parabens :) Nice to see some portuguese projects here. On a unrelated note, how did this end up on as the musicbox website framework? I worked in this project a while ago (backend and frontend clients only) and had no idea who did the musicbox.sapo.pt frontend.

Well, IIRC Ink came about due to the need to quickly build out sites like that (you'll notice SAPO is involved in a bunch of other services like that), and things dovetailed together when the site was revised recently.
Post reply on HN