Idle gossip about CSS

[andrew-bkk]

I have a couple of questions regarding CSS. Perhaps someone on this forum can give some answers.

Question 1

I have been asked to make a website for a hotel in Cambodia. The client wants the site to be modeled on the "banyantree" so I checked out the site and the site's CSS.

And the CSS is amazing. Here is a direct link to the CSS file, http://www.banyantree.com/themes/bt/css/screen.css.

My question is simple. Is this what people mean when they talk about CSS frameworks? And if so, what on earth is the point of it? I've really never seen anything like it.

Question 2

I'm currently redesigning a FOREX site. It's a bummer of a job because the CSS is so awful.

I mean, when I write CSS I ALWAYS write it consistently. But with this FOREX site, sometimes the background part comes first and sometimes it comes right at end. In other words, there is no logic or consistency, and it is this that slows me down.

So ... is there any sort of accepted convention which states that properties (or rules) ought to be defined in a specific order?

I personally have my own order and I always adhere to it. And I also write all my rules on a single line. If I don't don't, I end up with CSS files approximately 3.7 miles long.

But perhaps I am doing things wrong.

Should all that background-image stuff come first, or should it come last? Then again, should it sit fairly and squarely in the middle and enjoy the company of a flirtatious piece of padding on the left and a sexy little z-index on the right?

[Stevie D]

Question 1

I have been asked to make a website for a hotel in Cambodia. The client wants the site to be modeled on the "banyantree" so I checked out the site and the site's CSS.

And the CSS is amazing. Here is a direct link to the CSS file, http://www.banyantree.com/themes/bt/css/screen.css.

My question is simple. Is this what people mean when they talk about CSS frameworks? And if so, what on earth is the point of it? I've really never seen anything like it.

Holy guacamole! That is the most insane pile of steaming wotsit I've seen in a very long time.

While you may take inspiration from the visual design of the site, I would certainly NOT take any inspiration whatsoever from the CSS,

Question 2

I'm currently redesigning a FOREX site. It's a bummer of a job because the CSS is so awful.

I mean, when I write CSS I ALWAYS write it consistently. But with this FOREX site, sometimes the background part comes first and sometimes it comes right at end. In other words, there is no logic or consistency, and it is this that slows me down.

So ... is there any sort of accepted convention which states that properties (or rules) ought to be defined in a specific order?

There is no defined or recommended order - and a lot of CMS systems do make a complete hash of using concise and consistent CSS, and will actively sabotage any attempts you make to improve on their efforts. This is one of the pitfalls of using a CMS...

[Stomme poes]

I can't really say more but to agree with Stevie D... Jina Bolton gave a talk at Fronteers about how it bothered here when she first started working at some job that the other devs sorted everything alphabetically, while she sorted by box-type etc (much the way I do it... plus the argument that "the alphabet's always the same" doesn't help me because I have to sing parts of the Alphabet Song in my head to keep some of the letters' order straight... yeah I suck cause I'm stupid that way). The browser doesn't care about order any more than it cares about whitespace between semi-colons. There may be a style-guide at any particular design house though.

Any CSS that tells you "you have to put cellpadding and cellspacing in the HTML" is bogus and either written by a 'tard OR is just hideously out of date (I've never, ever, ever, not once, had to mention cellpadding or cellspacing in MY HTML... there are CSS properties for those).

[andrew-bkk]

While you may take inspiration from the visual design of the site, I would certainly NOT take any inspiration whatsoever from the CSS

Agreed! But why on earth have they done this?

Why why why why why why why why?

What am I missing?

What is the point?

Seriously, why?

[rguy84]

There is no standard of attribute order, I usually have my own order, but nothing fancy. The two things i have heard of is to put the attributes on their own line, hence why inline CSS is frowned upon. Second, use shorthand.

[rguy84]

Agreed! But why on earth have they done this?

Why why why why why why why why?

What am I missing?

What is the point?

Seriously, why?

They are using some editor or the developer is on some illicit drugs.

line-height: 1.6363636363636365em

^ Makes me giggle.

[Stomme poes]

Why why why why why why why why?

What am I missing?

What is the point?

Seriously, why?

You mean WHYWHYWHYWHY?

Some "developers" just "learn" how to "write" code by extensive copy-pasta. Apologies to His noodley appendage.

[kohoutek]

Andrew, I think it's this CSS framework, unfortunately a very popular one.

Why they do this? I guess the main goal for any of these is "work efficiency". That sounds cynical in a way when you look at the code.

[Stomme poes]

Jeff Croft's fault for starting it all with Blueprint.

[andrew-bkk]

They are using some editor or the developer is on some illicit drugs.

No! No no no no no no no no!

An editor can't auto-generate that stuff, and no one on illicit drugs could be that meticulous.

Could this be the work of ALIENS? Is this the beginning of the end?

[rguy84]

No! No no no no no no no no!

An editor can't auto-generate that stuff, and no one on illicit drugs could be that meticulous.

Could this be the work of ALIENS? Is this the beginning of the end?

the span-000 through 1xx is yelling generator. Dreamweaver used to generate names line this. For the 1.636363636363, no idea drugs, huffing paint, etc. I am no specialist but that is at least 1/32 of a pixel....

[andrew-bkk]

You mean WHYWHYWHYWHY?

Hi there funky Dutch woman. Sorry to say this, but your video sucks.

Try this one. It's a gem!

[rguy84]

Step out of the way

[kohoutek]

Guys, I posted the source just a few posts above yours. It's the 960.gs grid system and yeah, there's a generator as well.

[andrew-bkk]

Step out of the way

Culture, pure culture!

Now I understand everything.

I am now at peace with the world and my destiny. Finally, I am truly fulfilled.

[rguy84]

Guys, I posted the source just a few posts above yours. It's the 960.gs grid system and yeah, there's a generator as well.

I played with their generator, only got 3 decimal points not the 10 or so.

[noonnope]

you don't know what 1.6363636363636365em stands for? i thought you guys were smarter than that.

if you google, yahoo, bing it you get

Your search - 1.6363636363636365em - did not match any documents.

so i guess is for SEO: the highest result page and rank certified.


this or to encrypt the pin number: 6365.


that or for a a quick logic test:
1.6363636363636365em
1.6363636363636365636363636363636376em
?


need more?

[andrew-bkk]

you don't know what 1.6363636363636365em stands for? i thought you guys were smarter than that.

What on earth are you talking about?

And what does SEO have to do with "1.6363636363636365"?

My guess is that you've spent too much time watching that other guy's Llama video.

[noonnope]

you did get it's a joke, right?

this aside, you'll see that google is already making it the sole result for 1.6363636363636365em. logic, it was for SEO!

and 18/11 = 1.6363636363636365. so guess that what's for.

and this 18:11 aspect could be about: 480x576 4:3 frame with horizontal overscan, from the H264Parser, which is from a case instruction to get the aspect recalculated: aspect *= 1.6363636363636365;, related to MythTV, Open Source DVR.

hence line-height(aspect) = em*1.6363636363636365. who knows what for?

[xhtmlcoder]

It's because it is 16 significant placed number and fits within 960 all total overkill and damn framework bloated numbered classes, which nearly anybody who has dealt with modern CSS ideas will have probably come across.

Obviously you just select the appropriate class value range in the CSS then apply the markup class attribute value (to match) thus creating the desired "unit width" of your block. Making the CSS dictate the code's attribute class="..." values really - nothing more.

[Stevie D]

Agreed! But why on earth have they done this?

Why why why why why why why why?

What am I missing?

What is the point?

Because they don't understand the first thing about web design. That whole framework is about nailing pixels to a fixed viewport in a grid fashion. The huge long list of almost identical declarations that have just slightly different numbers are because it's a standard framework that can be applied to a site with any size elements you want, without having the faintest clue (a) what they are doing, or (b) what they are doing wrong.

It will only ever be used by people who should not be allowed near a website....