4 ms·

Another lightweight Bootstrap alternative from Yahoo, 4.4KB: http://purecss.io http://purecss.io

by ash 12y ago

franciscop 12y ago
That's what I based Picnic on! Read on the "Some love" in the last section, it's also a great library
- ash 12y ago
  That section says "inspiration from". Seems different from "based on". How is your project different from purecss?
  - progx 12y ago
    Yes and why should i use it and not purecss (which i currently use)
    - franciscop 12y ago
      Besides of the comment above, please use the one you prefer and fits better your needs. Clean html and out of the box options are Picnic strengths, flexibility and browser support are PureCSS strengths.
      - progx 12y ago
        Thanks for the short explanation.
  - franciscop 12y ago
    Picnic CSS sets the style of the default elements, while in Pure CSS you have to add them manually as classes. This means that Picnic just works out of the box while Pure is more flexible. There are some other smaller differences: - The <select> just looks nice with Picnic in Firefox. - Picnic relies in class combinations, while Pure relies in long specific class names. Compare <button class = "primary">Test</button> vs <button class = "btn btn-primary">Test</button> - Pure CSS is surely more solid; it's been created by Yahoo and tested by thousands of webs
service 12y ago
I'm a big fan of Min: http://minfwk.com/ http://minfwk.com/ 995 bytes!
- owenversteeg 12y ago
  Thanks! I'm the creator of Min. Are there any suggestions or improvements you have?
  - jbail 12y ago
    My first impression of min is that it looks nice. Really, for it's goals, it's pretty tight. As a branding thing, I'd change that URL. I get that it's short but minfwk.com doesn't really look like "Min Framework" to me. It just looks like a bunch of letters. A domain like mincss.com, getmin.com, minframework.com or something more legible would be better.
    - owenversteeg 12y ago
      > My first impression of min is that it looks nice. Really, for it's goals, it's pretty tight. Thanks! You have no idea how good that feels. > As a branding thing, I'd change that URL. I have had minframework.com for a while and still do, but it seems too long (Right now it redirects to minfwk.com) but I just got mincss.com and I prefer it quite a bit. I'll update Github accordingly. Thanks for the suggestion!

Another lightweight Bootstrap alternative from Yahoo, 4.4KB: http://purecss.io http://purecss.io

by ash 12y ago

Another lightweight Bootstrap alternative from Yahoo, 4.4KB: http://purecss.io http://purecss.io

franciscop 12y ago

That's what I based Picnic on! Read on the "Some love" in the last section, it's also a great library

ash 12y ago
That section says "inspiration from". Seems different from "based on". How is your project different from purecss?
- progx 12y ago
  Yes and why should i use it and not purecss (which i currently use)
  - franciscop 12y ago
    Besides of the comment above, please use the one you prefer and fits better your needs. Clean html and out of the box options are Picnic strengths, flexibility and browser support are PureCSS strengths.
    - progx 12y ago
      Thanks for the short explanation.
- franciscop 12y ago
  Picnic CSS sets the style of the default elements, while in Pure CSS you have to add them manually as classes. This means that Picnic just works out of the box while Pure is more flexible. There are some other smaller differences: - The <select> just looks nice with Picnic in Firefox. - Picnic relies in class combinations, while Pure relies in long specific class names. Compare <button class = "primary">Test</button> vs <button class = "btn btn-primary">Test</button> - Pure CSS is surely more solid; it's been created by Yahoo and tested by thousands of webs

service 12y ago

I'm a big fan of Min: http://minfwk.com/ http://minfwk.com/ 995 bytes!

owenversteeg 12y ago
Thanks! I'm the creator of Min. Are there any suggestions or improvements you have?
- jbail 12y ago
  My first impression of min is that it looks nice. Really, for it's goals, it's pretty tight. As a branding thing, I'd change that URL. I get that it's short but minfwk.com doesn't really look like "Min Framework" to me. It just looks like a bunch of letters. A domain like mincss.com, getmin.com, minframework.com or something more legible would be better.
  - owenversteeg 12y ago
    > My first impression of min is that it looks nice. Really, for it's goals, it's pretty tight. Thanks! You have no idea how good that feels. > As a branding thing, I'd change that URL. I have had minframework.com for a while and still do, but it seems too long (Right now it redirects to minfwk.com) but I just got mincss.com and I prefer it quite a bit. I'll update Github accordingly. Thanks for the suggestion!