4 ms·
Isn’t that what utility classes are? Shorthand for inline styles? Not saying it’s good/bad, but it feels like that’s the use case
by digitalPhonix 8mo ago
Isn’t that what utility classes are? Shorthand for inline styles?
Not saying it’s good/bad, but it feels like that’s the use case
- francislavoie 8mo agoIt's much more than that because it can make use of CSS pseudo selectors like hover, which is not possible with inline styles.
- rafark 8mo agoUnder that definition any css class is a shorthand for inline styles
- digitalPhonix 8mo agoThere's a big difference between utility classes which are shorthand for inline styles (random example from Tailwind's site where every single class is a one-to-one mapping with a single style override.): class="ml-3 hidden rounded-lg bg-gray-100 px-2 py-0.5 text-xs/6 font-semibold whitespace-nowrap text-gray-700 lg:block dark:bg-gray-400/15 dark:text-gray-300" and semantic names which use the CSS cascade: class="main-content subheading" Calling that a shorthand for inline styles is just being obtuse.
- Sateeshm 8mo agoMedia queries, pseudo selectors, extensible design system with sensible and practical defaults, and many more