111–120 of 174 posts
I'm puzzled about the switch from camelCase to snake_case for JS as shown in http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/upgrading.html#javascript-va... . The clear convention in JavaScript is camelCase, why switch away from it? (I say this as someone who in normal life using Python and Rust uses and prefers snake_case but who uses camelCase when writing JavaScript.)
> The clear convention in JavaScript is camelCase, why switch away from it? Citation?
JavaScript.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi. Our company, Blue Jay Themes, specializes in making good-looking Foundation themes. Please follow us on Twitter and we’ll let you know when we launch in just a couple of weeks. Another great way to stay updated is by subscribing to our newsletter, which can be found on our website. Thanks. http://www.bluejaythemes.com/ http://www.twitter.com/bluejaythemes
Do you really need to verify email addresses on the newsletter-signup form? Are you seeing abuse where a bad person signs up someone else?
I use Bootstrap, but it looks to me like Foundation5 is a better framework and is making faster progress. Especially I like Foundations use of SASS. Problem is - some widgets I depend on - like date-pickers and X-Editable - only support Bootstrap.
[1] http://getbootstrap.com/customize/#less [2] https://github.com/thomas-mcdonald/bootstrap-sass
Changes of note: "Interchange uses media queries to dynamically load responsive content that is appropriate for different users' browsers.” http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/interchange.html Offcanvas Javascript (Originally bolt-on, not bundled) http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/offcanvas.html "Abide is an HTML5 form validation library that supports the native API by using patterns and required attr…
I've been looking through this, trying to remember why I recently switched to Bootstrap. Was it a widget that was missing? Maybe a date-picker? Foundation doesn't really have date-pickers and such. Hrm. Oh, right. It was angular-ui, which uses Bootstrap. Angular integration for any of these projects is a BIG win. Because of that, I'm eagerly awaiting an RC for Angular-Semantic[1], so that I can cut over to Semantic-U…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been looking through this, trying to remember why I recently switched to Bootstrap. Was it a widget that was missing? Maybe a date-picker? Foundation doesn't really have date-pickers and such. Hrm. Oh, right. It was angular-ui, which uses Bootstrap. Angular integration for any of these projects is a BIG win. Because of that, I'm eagerly awaiting an RC for Angular-Semantic[1], so that I can cut over to Semantic-U…
Angular UI Bootstrap is CSS agnostic - you can use it with Foundation just fine
The Angular-UI implementation, while self-contained, is going to have a different .modal() implementation than Foundation's, so there's always going to be relics in the implementation.
Implementing twice the framework for the same functionality seems a sure fire way to induce headaches.
Your advice isn't wrong, and worked great for a good number of months, but requires ignoring the JS components of Foundation altogether, which somewhat negates the benefits of having a big ol' framework in the first place (IMHO).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi. Our company, Blue Jay Themes, specializes in making good-looking Foundation themes. Please follow us on Twitter and we’ll let you know when we launch in just a couple of weeks. Another great way to stay updated is by subscribing to our newsletter, which can be found on our website. Thanks. http://www.bluejaythemes.com/ http://www.twitter.com/bluejaythemes
Do you really need to verify email addresses on the newsletter-signup form? Are you seeing abuse where a bad person signs up someone else?
Keep double opt-in, it's necessary (and I think required in Mailchimp's case unless you use the API directly).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you really need to verify email addresses on the newsletter-signup form? Are you seeing abuse where a bad person signs up someone else?
Verifying email addresses is vitally important for building a high quality list. Otherwise, you can easily sign up other people for the list, they get essentially a spam email, report it as spam, and all of a sudden your list is crap because they didn't have double opt-in. Keep double opt-in, it's necessary (and I think required in Mailchimp's case unless you use the API directly).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Angular UI Bootstrap is CSS agnostic - you can use it with Foundation just fine
I'm aware of that, but there are styling differences between Foundation and Bootstrap. The Angular-UI implementation, while self-contained, is going to have a different .modal() implementation than Foundation's, so there's always going to be relics in the implementation. Implementing twice the framework for the same functionality seems a sure fire way to induce headaches. Your advice isn't wrong, and worked great for…
Chrome zoomed in at 125% is enough to break the layout on the getting started page, which is a little worrying.
Wow, that was fast ! I love Foundation, but I had to switch to Boostrap because I found it... ugly. And Bootstrap is great to quickly create "pretty" prototypes. But I've always found Foundation having better... foundations. I've used both on numerous projects and here's my take : * The grid system now looks like bootstrap, and I don't like that. You have to choose the type of column you want to use (and I don't want…
> I love Foundation, but I had to switch to Boostrap because I found it... ugly. I consider this is a strength, the styling is thinner so it's easier to customise. Bootstrap can feel like a bit of a battle if you want to customise it a lot. I think bootstrap is perfect for admin pages but for something a bit more custom I think foundation strikes a good balance.