A modern responsive front-end framework based on Material Design

Post by rezistik » Fri, Apr 24, 2015, 2:43 PM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #31

dovel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont do this repeating class business but CSS Tricks 'css guidelines' web page says that when you do : '.collection li', it first searches through the page for all 'li's then wittles it down to the ones within the correct parent. Essentially that css selectors work from right to left. So I guess the idea is that classing up the li elements within a parent may be marginally quicker? I have never bothered though. Doe…

Modern browsers do their best to optimize typical use-cases for CSS selectors and .collection li for sure will be handled optimally. You shouldn't worry about CSS selector performance unless you have to provide good performance for very old browsers or hit specific performance problem. Optimize for humans, not for computers.

Post by kenbellows » Fri, Apr 24, 2015, 2:57 PM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #39

V-2 wrote: post #33

Nice. I'm not a Google fanboy, but I believe Material is the best visual language for UI. Okay, there are different contexts, but it's best thought-through, and most modern. For instance, the use of animation is finally mature and at the same rich and amplifying user experience (rather than being an eye-candy). And I think it's very compatible with web apps. A Material-ish popular chess site: http://en.lichess.org/ (…

What? Why? I personally find Material to be hideous because of its color abuse. It makes your UI look like an over-saturated Fischer-Price toy because of all the bright primary colors everywhere, and that's before we get into the lack of shadow and shading that seems to have infected "modern" design.

Post by sergiotapia » Fri, Apr 24, 2015, 2:58 PM UTC

bjrnjs wrote: post #9

This looks really good, but the jQuery dependency makes it unfortunately less interesting. It should be possible to have the jQuery dependency optional, possibly only for legacy browser support.

Post by spankalee » Fri, Apr 24, 2015, 3:01 PM UTC

rezistik wrote: post #50

bbx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell your lead front dev this approach isn't best practice at all. You want one collection li's to not have the style? Use an alternative class on the ul: "collection collection-alt". You want nested li's to not inherit the styles? Use ".collection > li" in your CSS. In any case, assigning a class on each li goes exactly against CSS best practices, because it prevents taking advantage of the inheritance of property v…

There are performance considerations as well. Using selectors is more performant than raw tags. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/CSS/Writi... Using nesting and tags is less performant than classes. So using more classes is better than less.

Post by solve » Fri, Apr 24, 2015, 3:23 PM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #39

V-2 wrote: post #33

Nice. I'm not a Google fanboy, but I believe Material is the best visual language for UI. Okay, there are different contexts, but it's best thought-through, and most modern. For instance, the use of animation is finally mature and at the same rich and amplifying user experience (rather than being an eye-candy). And I think it's very compatible with web apps. A Material-ish popular chess site: http://en.lichess.org/ (…

What? Why? I personally find Material to be hideous because of its color abuse. It makes your UI look like an over-saturated Fischer-Price toy because of all the bright primary colors everywhere, and that's before we get into the lack of shadow and shading that seems to have infected "modern" design.