3 ms·

I use bootstrap. On 90% of my projects, you wouldn't be able to tell without looking at the source. So, I'm not sure what bootstrap has to do with design pract

by sjs382 11y ago

I use bootstrap. On 90% of my projects, you wouldn't be able to tell without looking at the source. So, I'm not sure what bootstrap has to do with design practices. You can implement any design using bootstrap. As far as being heavy, just go through and throw out the stuff you don't need. It's reasonably modular. It seems as if the other developer doesn't like how default bootstrap looks (or is bored by the overuse of default bootstrap), and he's justifying his preference. Otherwise, ask him what "best practices" are missed.

hmillison 11y ago
Do you just create a bootstrap-theme to make it look unique? I'm interested in learning more about how to take advantage of the good parts of bootstrap without having a site that looks too much like vanilla bootstrap.
- sjs382 11y ago
  In my day job, I work for an agency. We get a design proof, in PSD format. I mentally translate it into a wireframe (which admittedly is kind of backward), and lay out that wireframe using the bootstrap classes that most closely match the layout. From there, I iterate, to match the design proofs. The designers don't use any bootstrap design, so the bootstrap styles never come through in the final product. The "right way" to do it (which I don't do) would be to use LESS mixins, so as not to have Bootstrap classes polluting the source, but I mostly work on short-turnaround projects so I stick with the Bootstrap classes.
  - tlong 11y ago
    Yeah. I'm used to doing the same. Thanks
panorama 11y ago
OP likely means functional design as opposed to aesthetic. For example, I don't particularly like Bootstrap's unsemantic class naming schema. Although admittedly, most CSS frameworks are just as guilty; Bootstrap just happens to be the most popular.
- sjs382 11y ago
  If you have a problem like that, you're using bootstrap the wrong way. It's okay—I do, too. The right way is to use LESS mixins to match bootstrap classes with your semantic classnames.
  - tacone 11y ago
    Less-mixin wrappers are not the right way, but just one way that somebody once stated to be the best. I used the semantic mixins method quite a while, and let me say that it does not feel that good. Once you have your html full of nice "article-box" classes, who will ever notice? If you strip completely your css from your markup to re-use it in another project, you're left with literally nothing, if not a bunch of semantic classes than then may also be semantically wrong in respect of the new project (has the article become a tutorial?). Using bootstrap classes are a convention you can reuse in other projects, as well as override when you need. If you strip your css then, and replace it with a vanilla bootstrap, you'll get a halfway good looking page you can work on. It's perfectly ok to pursue semantics, except that semantic class attributes are the most useless form of semantics. In a time where angular and react challenged the very concepts of markup/behaviour/styling separation, after the utter failure of XHTML (the parsable markup nobody ever parsed) and the mild failure of HTML5 semantic tags (whose cases of use are confusing at most, and overlap dramatically with the arya attributes) I try to avoid to be too strict about semantics.

by sjs382 11y ago

hmillison 11y ago

Do you just create a bootstrap-theme to make it look unique? I'm interested in learning more about how to take advantage of the good parts of bootstrap without having a site that looks too much like vanilla bootstrap.

sjs382 11y ago
In my day job, I work for an agency. We get a design proof, in PSD format. I mentally translate it into a wireframe (which admittedly is kind of backward), and lay out that wireframe using the bootstrap classes that most closely match the layout. From there, I iterate, to match the design proofs. The designers don't use any bootstrap design, so the bootstrap styles never come through in the final product. The "right way" to do it (which I don't do) would be to use LESS mixins, so as not to have Bootstrap classes polluting the source, but I mostly work on short-turnaround projects so I stick with the Bootstrap classes.
- tlong 11y ago
  Yeah. I'm used to doing the same. Thanks

panorama 11y ago

OP likely means functional design as opposed to aesthetic. For example, I don't particularly like Bootstrap's unsemantic class naming schema. Although admittedly, most CSS frameworks are just as guilty; Bootstrap just happens to be the most popular.

sjs382 11y ago
If you have a problem like that, you're using bootstrap the wrong way. It's okay—I do, too. The right way is to use LESS mixins to match bootstrap classes with your semantic classnames.
- tacone 11y ago
  Less-mixin wrappers are not the right way, but just one way that somebody once stated to be the best. I used the semantic mixins method quite a while, and let me say that it does not feel that good. Once you have your html full of nice "article-box" classes, who will ever notice? If you strip completely your css from your markup to re-use it in another project, you're left with literally nothing, if not a bunch of semantic classes than then may also be semantically wrong in respect of the new project (has the article become a tutorial?). Using bootstrap classes are a convention you can reuse in other projects, as well as override when you need. If you strip your css then, and replace it with a vanilla bootstrap, you'll get a halfway good looking page you can work on. It's perfectly ok to pursue semantics, except that semantic class attributes are the most useless form of semantics. In a time where angular and react challenged the very concepts of markup/behaviour/styling separation, after the utter failure of XHTML (the parsable markup nobody ever parsed) and the mild failure of HTML5 semantic tags (whose cases of use are confusing at most, and overlap dramatically with the arya attributes) I try to avoid to be too strict about semantics.