Hi Carlos, As I said in my last post, you are welcome to write different layout classes. We don't all have to agree on "one right answer". There often isn't one right answer. Code up what you want to see and document why you like it. Our users will then be able to choose. We will probably not sweep the entire framework and only use one.
You approach is valid, but I'm pretty sure when you finish it, it will be slightly larger and run slightly more code, and require a few more browser/cpu cycles to run. But that's ok. That's why we'll probably keep what we have now and users will be able to choose. I still don't get why, if your Button is a subcomponent, some framework code was setting display style on it unless you were using a layout class in the component itself. Thanks, -Alex On 3/12/18, 3:44 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >I must say that I was wrong in some part of my argumentation. I though the >problem was in UIBase setting up things like display:block, but after >looking at layout code since Harbs pointed me try to duplicate it by my >side I saw is the vertical layout what was setting the inline styles. For >that reason removing the display :block code I found in UIBase, doesn't >make effect (what makes me think what that code does really or if is dead >code, anyway something to look in the future). > >So I tried to create my own layout in Jewel and only seeing what happen >commenting the part where the hardcoded is setup and change to a className >assignation. > >As a test I put the following rule in jewel.css > >.vertical-layout-padding-gap { > display: block !important; >} > >and that work right :). > >To make paddings and gap I think the right way is to separate in different >rules one for the vertical layout and others for padding, gap, and so, >using cascading, maybe I should use pseudo-selectors like :before and >:after for first and last elements. > >In the end since Harbs thinks inline is right, and I'm in the opposite >thinking. I can make my own layouts for Jewel. >It's like CSS. basics I discussed in other thread, I think I'll not >affected by that since although I'm extending basic, I'm using my own >class >selectors and html structure. > >If you're all right with this I think we can go this way. > >Let me know what do you think > >Thanks > >Carlos > > > >2018-03-12 11:39 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]>: > >> >> 2018-03-12 11:29 GMT+01:00 Harbs <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> Can you explain why you care about inline CSS? I’m not getting it. >>> >>> >> As I get the basis of jewel and jewel theme working right, I want to >>start >> creating blog examples with the code and I know, people out there that >> wants to see if we are a option for their problems will look at the >>code we >> produce. If they see lots of styles hardcoded, my presumption is that >>will >> not had a good feeling about us and its one thing that can make us not >>be >> elegible us their technology of choice. I want to avoid that. >> >> >>> If find it much easier to understand inline CSS. It’s sometimes >>>difficult >>> to figure out what sets specific inline styles, but it’s also difficult >>> sometimes to figure out what sets classes. Working through complex CSS >>> style sheets and figuring out which sheet is setting what style and >>>why is >>> a *very* time consuming process. In my experience, style sheets makes >>> debugging more difficult and not easier. >>> >>> >> But that's where documentation comes in. If you see a clean html line >> where a button tag has organized semantic class like "jewel button >>primary >> vertical-layout", that's for me better than lots of styles there. Then >>in >> docs you can see that vertical-layout stands for >> >> .vertical-layout >> { >> display: block; >> } >> >> for that's more clear. The html more leaner. Maybe as you point, the >> performance is not as good as inline, but don't think that will be >>enough >> to not consider all the benefits. In the end things goes to separate >>html >> from css, so I think that's the principal pattern and browser devs has >>in >> mind to get performant css. >> >> >> -- >> Carlos Rovira >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me% >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4e82b3ca849c44dc4a9408 >>d5880657b1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63656448354452207 >>6&sdata=nn%2B5FpOQnNAYN5SdSdSTZ99WhKgGKhOse3w5S7ct2Vc%3D&reserved=0 >> >> > > >-- >Carlos Rovira >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2 >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4e82b3ca849c44dc4a9408d5 >880657b1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636564483544522076&s >data=nn%2B5FpOQnNAYN5SdSdSTZ99WhKgGKhOse3w5S7ct2Vc%3D&reserved=0
