31–40 of 71 posts
.make-column(@large, @medium, @small, @tiny: 12) { .make-xs-column(@tiny); .make-sm-column(@small); .make-md-column(@medium); .make-lg-column(@large); }
Then use it with: section#main-content { .make-column(8,8,9,12); }
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternatively use SASS (and the bootstrap SASS port[1]) which doesn't has this problem, as it instead rewrites selectors. i.e. if you have: .column { width: 100px; display: inline-block; } And you do: .cool-sidebar { @extend .column; } Then the generated css will be something like: .column, .cool-sidebar { width: 100px; display: inline-block; } [1] https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-sass
Less has the same feature: http://lesscss.org/features/#extend-feature
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nicer looking div soup is still div soup. != semantic.
no, but or are semantic, and there's no reason you couldn't use those instead of by using the features of LESS or SASS.
Still the most comprehensive rebuttal to this common (and I feel, badly mistaken) complaint: "About HTML semantics and front-end architecture" (from March 2012): http://nicolasgallagher.com/about-html-semantics-front-end-a... It's all well worth reading, but the conclusion is particularly to the point: "The experience of many skilled developers, over many years, has led to a shift in how large-scale website and appli…
The point of using bootstrap is a reusable set of classes. I really dont care wether class names are semantic or not,it doesnt change anything,except for pedantic people looking at your source code. SEO doesnt care , users dont care, accessibility doesnt care either. Using new HTML5 tags is good enough and was designed for that specific purpose. If i want semantics I use nav,aside,section instead of div,and so on. No…
Still the most comprehensive rebuttal to this common (and I feel, badly mistaken) complaint: "About HTML semantics and front-end architecture" (from March 2012): http://nicolasgallagher.com/about-html-semantics-front-end-a... It's all well worth reading, but the conclusion is particularly to the point: "The experience of many skilled developers, over many years, has led to a shift in how large-scale website and appli…
That's no rebuttal, just an opinion. Oh we got this huge app and are to lazy to do everything properly.
Still the most comprehensive rebuttal to this common (and I feel, badly mistaken) complaint: "About HTML semantics and front-end architecture" (from March 2012): http://nicolasgallagher.com/about-html-semantics-front-end-a... It's all well worth reading, but the conclusion is particularly to the point: "The experience of many skilled developers, over many years, has led to a shift in how large-scale website and appli…
That's no rebuttal, just an opinion. Oh we got this huge app and are to lazy to do everything properly.
Also, laziness is one of the three great virtues of a programmer according to Larry Wall. People are getting things done with Bootstrap every day.
We need a better word for this than "semantic". We're just passing the complexity back and forth between the HTML and the CSS, and the only "semantics" or meaning that arise are to the author/editor. Users don't care, machines don't care, and I've never, ever seen a large-scale site design that doesn't involve some reworking of both the HTML and the CSS.