4 ms·

To be fair you've been able to do that with display: table-cell etc. I do love seeing <div class="table"> around the place. Sigh.

• spaceribs 10y ago
  Not exactly, you couldn't get colspans or rowspans with that.
  • andybak 10y ago
    I hadn't thought of that.
  • naasking 10y ago
    Yeah, they really dropped the ball on that. Being able to specify vertical and horizontal layouts this way would have solved a lot of problems that now require flex and soon CSS grids.
• TeMPOraL 10y ago
  Better that way than the standard practice of littering your code with semantically meaningless divs that are there just as hooks for CSS rules.
• pweissbrod 10y ago
  As someone who does minimal front-end work I rely on bootstrap when I need quick UIs and try to read HN to understand the trends. This comment made me laugh. From an outsider perspective it looks like div is the new table. The latest fashion in style
• ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  Just as an fyi, I count 17 uses of display: table-cell and it's siblings in the Bootstrap 3 less code (possibly more once compiled to CSS). They didn't use it for their grid implementation though, and since they have found and documented a lot of very obscure browser compatibility bugs as part of their work, I'd guess they had a good reason for choosing what they did.