4 ms·
"Am I the only one that doesn't understand everyone's obsession with CSS grids" I saw a great talk by Nicole Sullivan on CSS last week. She said that many site
by clutchski 15y ago
"Am I the only one that doesn't understand everyone's obsession with CSS grids"
I saw a great talk by Nicole Sullivan on CSS last week. She said that many sites lack a meaningful high-level abstraction for their visual layout, and end up with a tangled mess of float, padding & margin declarations on every element. This complexity, she said, is more clearly and concisely handled at a higher, site-wide level and suggested using a grid.
I've wasted an insane amount of time pushing one element four pixels this way and another element three pixels that way, so I'm definitely eager to try a grid on my next project.
Links to her slides (with some other great info) and her grid framework:
http://www.slideshare.net/stubbornella/our-best-practices-are-killing-us http://www.slideshare.net/stubbornella/our-best-practices-ar...
https://github.com/stubbornella/oocss/blob/master/core/grid/grids.css https://github.com/stubbornella/oocss/blob/master/core/grid/...
- bgrohman 15y agoI think a high level abstraction with semantic meaning is important. If you want to include the layout styles in that abstraction, that's one thing. But if you want a simplified way to set the layout without building the grid system yourself, what choice do you have besides including layout-only classes on your html elements? So I agree with Breefield that it's not optimal to have separate class definitions outside of your high level semantic abstraction for the sole purpose of layout. But I don't know of any other way to do it other than just building the grid into your abstraction, which means you can't reuse existing css layout systems (unless you just copy the code... ick...).