3 ms·
I used to hear that dogma too. And then all of a sudden I'm reading everywhere that I should check out bootstrap.css, which flies straight in the face of semant
by sopooneo 13y ago
I used to hear that dogma too. And then all of a sudden I'm reading everywhere that I should check out bootstrap.css, which flies straight in the face of semantic markup by requiring you to use class names that are descriptive of their layout effect. I don't know if there is overlap between the evangalizers of semantic markup and bootstrap.css, but if so, it would seem contradictory.
- ricardobeat 13y agoClasses and IDs have no semantic purpose in HTML[1]. Bootstrap's approach is bad from a developer's perspective, but is not bad as long as you use the right elements. [1] search/indexing bots do look at classes to try to make sense of a page, but only because of tag soup and the lack of structural elements before html5
- woah 13y agoI used to be against class names that are descriptive of their layout effect, but honestly, it's the simplest way a lot of the time. You can't always think up the exact right name for a random element somewhere on a site, and getting into the habit of using sane oocss can save a bunch of time.