4 ms·
They reinvent inline styles, then they reinvent classes! It's kind of impressive. I read through the docs, trying to find a value proposition to this over CSS
by Semiapies 5y ago
They reinvent inline styles, then they reinvent classes! It's kind of impressive.
I read through the docs, trying to find a value proposition to this over CSS. So far, the benefits claimed amount to "knowing how to use development tools is scary", "you can abbreviate properties into incomprehensibility", "here are some new values and defaults to keep straight".
In terms of what you can't do with plain old inline CSS? Apparently, just some parlor tricks like styling sub-elements (with a cumbersome syntax) and some concise transitions.
- tompazourek 5y ago> In terms of what you can't do with plain old inline CSS? AFAIK you cannot do responsive stuff (media queries) in the style attribute.
- Semiapies 5y agoI don't see than you can really work with arbitrary media queries in this, either. There are just some combinations of widths and orientations baked in, which is nothing new.
- tompazourek 5y agoYou're right that you still cannot do arbitrary media queries there. But from my experience (I'm not a designer though), staying within a set of predefined breakpoints (xs, sm, md, lg, xl) is often enough for most web pages. The style attribute doesn't allow you to do anything responsive at all on the other hand.
- Semiapies 5y agoThat's what classes are for. (Which this also reinvents.)