81–90 of 149 posts
I've tried to keep it as tiny as possible with just under 3kb when gzipped. What would you change? What would you add? Any feedback or pull request is greatly welcome! MIT Licensed
One thing I didn't see was the ability to add offsets to a grid item?
I've tried to keep it as tiny as possible with just under 3kb when gzipped. What would you change? What would you add? Any feedback or pull request is greatly welcome! MIT Licensed
These days I actually use Foundation by Zurb which I think is arguably one of the best front-end CSS libraries out there, it allows greater control and offers some awesome Javascript components. Not only that, it has a great grid system like Bootstrap, but it is by far, the least opinionated and most powerful front-end library out there.
Cudos for trimming the fat and offering an alternative for those who use Bootstrap. My only nitpick is those bevelled buttons don't look very nice and the classes for the grid system using fractions might be a little confusion for some who are bad at maths and fractions (like me). I prefer having the option of putting the number in the class like in Bootstrap: col-md-6 as opposed to using a class called "half"
I tried using Bootstrap and other CSS frameworks and (as mentioned in the comments) I felt like I was fighting the frameworks to get it to do what I wanted to do. The problem with CSS frameworks is that they are invasive when it comes to writing semantic HTML. As someone who is working on developing semantic HTML and improving the skill, its annoying when you use a CSS framework which it encourages you to perform inl…
I like the intent behind the Semantic UI project, but I feel like CSS preprocessors like LESS and SASS allow for semantic markup through the use of mixin functions out of the box without needing to use anything else.
I like www.minfwk.com But it's a little more extreme.
Secondly, I'm the creator of Min (http://minfwk.com), a fellow small CSS framework. Min is only 995 bytes - 5 times smaller. It also is more widely used, has feature parity with Bootstrap through the Min Bootstrap plugin, supports IE5.5+, is valid CSS, and doesn't have browser bugs. There's also an easy way to migrate from Bootstrap to Min (the Bootstrap->Min converter.)
Why would someone use Picnic.css rather than Min? I'd like to see the advantages of Picnic.css straight from the creator, since it seems you're answering questions in this thread. It seems one of the advantages you're touting is the "invasive"ness, which is a cool approach (I don't see Min taking that approach for various reasons but I think it can be a better choice for many use cases.) Another seems to be the grid naming system. What other things would make someone prefer Picnic.css for their project?
First of all, I want to say that I like the vibrant colors, small size, and checkable buttons. Smaller (and JS-less) CSS frameworks is something that I've been crusading for for years now. Secondly, I'm the creator of Min ( http://minfwk.com ), a fellow small CSS framework. Min is only 995 bytes - 5 times smaller. It also is more widely used, has feature parity with Bootstrap through the Min Bootstrap plugin, support…
[1]: http://cardinalcss.com/ [2]: http://www.jjude.biz
First of all, I want to say that I like the vibrant colors, small size, and checkable buttons. Smaller (and JS-less) CSS frameworks is something that I've been crusading for for years now. Secondly, I'm the creator of Min ( http://minfwk.com ), a fellow small CSS framework. Min is only 995 bytes - 5 times smaller. It also is more widely used, has feature parity with Bootstrap through the Min Bootstrap plugin, support…
Its always good to have options. As much as I'm supportive of promoting your own work its a little bit in bad taste to smash and promote your project one a submission like this.