Shouldn't a language for sharing UI be human readable like QML ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QML#Basic_syntax ) instead of machine readable like XML with its claustrophobic tag soup mess, flow killing end tags, and so on?
Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
71–80 of 85 posts
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#72Great idea except you don't namespace anything! I like namespaces because one library or css import from another won't ever stomp on each other. I've seen 'ui', 'button' and 'red' in several other packages and places. They're going to conflict. The one with the greatest specifity is going to win and cause untold hours of frustrating debugging.
+1 with that. I dont understand why css framework authors dont namespace their frameworks. That's should be a basic requirement before distributing any css library.
Because it makes the selectors less efficient. On individual selectors it probably doesn't make much of a difference (for most of them at least) but add it all up and you can have a significant impact on performance for large DOM trees.
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#73I see semantics is much inclined to OOCSS (object oriented CSS) which is actually good because the project is cleaner, works really great for large websites with lots of pages.
But it's poorly executed. The good deal is, to use Bootstrap + OOCSS. Ive had really good experiences and full control of the project by this method.
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#74Hey, I'm jack the guy behind semantic UI. Semantic isn't ready for release yet. A lot of the copy on the site is only currently in draft form. and there are plenty of inconsistencies with the code base itself. Hell, there isn't even a download link. I've been privately been working on the framework trying to get it to a place where i'm happy enough to open it up for outside feedback and it's not quite there yet. The…
Seriously, HN? Downvoting a post by the guy behind the actual project so much that it (currently) ends up at the bottom of the discussion? Wow!
(That said, I don't agree with the author's opinion but it just seemed so disrespectful. Obviously quite some work went into this already and visually, it shows.)
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really liked it visually speaking but yes, buttons implemented as divs it's sad.
It's a tag ambivalent CSS library. There's nothing sad about that. Just use buttons tags, it's not stopping you. Don't get hung up on the demo code.
It's a little concerning using library claims to be about "semantic" when the demo code doesn't even care about using the semantic tag for button. It makes you worried if the author actually knows what he's doing.
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#76Agree with everyone else on the semantic issue, nonetheless I'm loving the theme and built-in features and would 100% use this for some prototype builds.
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#77In their examples, none of their buttons were actually buttons. Nor were they even links. They were all DIVs. This is pretty terrible HTML, for many reasons, especially for accessibility.
Not any more.
There are tags you can put on your markup that will tell screenreaders and other accessibility tools that this thing is a button, there is an entire set of aria roles and states for things like checkboxes, buttons and other ui objects so you aren't limited to the defaults provided by the various html standards.
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#78Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#79This is really nice, certain parts are just amazing. Such nice UI flow. I will keep an eye on it and try and use it in my next project!
Re: Semantic UI – A language for sharing UI
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah that one was too specific for my liking I don't think you should use colors names like 'red' as a class. What if you decide you don't want it to be red?
Remove the "red" class from the element? I used to eschew any and all presentational classes, but it makes development quicker for me to use them occasionally, esp with css frameworks.
I guess my point was you'd have to refactor your html and css as well as the property itself