> I think you're mistaking a single Functional CSS implementation (like the one used by the author) with the concept itself. Honestly at some point what you de

> I think you're mistaking a single Functional CSS implementation (like the one used by the author) with the concept itself. Honestly at some point what you describe I would just describe as normal CSS. Functional CSS is classes based on their visual function rather than an abstract concept. This the definition. But the more semantic your names are the less they related to an actual visual function. If on mobile you don't apply any padding then your padding CSS class is a lie. And if you don't call it "padding" in some way then it's not Functional CSS. I also think conceptually having a few utility classes like "print-visible" or "print-invisible" is not really applying Functional CSS as an overall concept.