John Mark Engle wrote:
Maybe, though, extending off of this, perhaps more sensible default css should be encouraged. For modules, it should be as flexible as possible, and fit into most themes.
Sensible defaults sound good, until you start asking what is sensible. Everyone has their on opinion about what is proper white spacing, what is proper setup for thier module. In the case of eventfinder.css, it was trying to float the contents and set it to a width of 200 so it would look like a block or something inside the node area. The problem was, this code didn't work on Firefox, or Internet Explorer 6. Not exactly sure what browser this code was originally tested on.
The point is, someone thought, at one time, it might be a good idea to make it look like it was, and maybe to them, it was sensible.
:/ Maybe if we came up with a set of Module design standards for people to go by. You've got a good idea, it's just, how do you enforce a subjective standard.
Trae
On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 10:33 -0500, Trae McCombs wrote:
John Mark Engle wrote:
Maybe, though, extending off of this, perhaps more sensible default css should be encouraged. For modules, it should be as flexible as possible, and fit into most themes.
Sensible defaults sound good, until you start asking what is sensible. Everyone has their on opinion about what is proper white spacing, what is proper setup for thier module. In the case of eventfinder.css, it was trying to float the contents and set it to a width of 200 so it would look like a block or something inside the node area. The problem was, this code didn't work on Firefox, or Internet Explorer 6. Not exactly sure what browser this code was originally tested on.
The point is, someone thought, at one time, it might be a good idea to make it look like it was, and maybe to them, it was sensible.
:/ Maybe if we came up with a set of Module design standards for people to go by. You've got a good idea, it's just, how do you enforce a subjective standard.
Trae
On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 12:32 -0500, Darrel O'Pry wrote:
On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 10:33 -0500, Trae McCombs wrote:
John Mark Engle wrote:
Maybe, though, extending off of this, perhaps more sensible default css should be encouraged. For modules, it should be as flexible as possible, and fit into most themes.
Sensible defaults sound good, until you start asking what is sensible. Everyone has their on opinion about what is proper white spacing, what is proper setup for thier module. In the case of eventfinder.css, it was trying to float the contents and set it to a width of 200 so it would look like a block or something inside the node area. The problem was, this code didn't work on Firefox, or Internet Explorer 6. Not exactly sure what browser this code was originally tested on.
The point is, someone thought, at one time, it might be a good idea to make it look like it was, and maybe to them, it was sensible.
:/ Maybe if we came up with a set of Module design standards for people to go by. You've got a good idea, it's just, how do you enforce a subjective standard.
Trae
oops I meant to say...
Well the idea of sensible is a consensus of whats right and a best practices page :)... Not really a standard, but a set of suggested guidelines would be very nice.
Not sure if this is really on topic, since I'm coming in the tail end of the conversation.
Personally I think there should be a set of standard css classes.... something like...
.bg-color-primary, .bg-color-compliment-1, .bg-color-compliment-2 .text-color-primary, .text-color-compliment-1, .text-color-compliment-2 .wrapper, .box, etc..
Someone with a better grasp of color theory, css, and drupal theming would probably be a better candidate for working that out...
Then suggest to module developers where/how these default classes should be used, and to include a module-specific class in the class tag...
ie) <div class='.box .box-$module'> </div>
Along with encouraging heavy use of span and div in place of traditional html elements.
Darrel O'Pry wrote: <snip>
Well the idea of sensible is a consensus of whats right and a best practices page :)... Not really a standard, but a set of suggested guidelines would be very nice.
Right...
Not sure if this is really on topic, since I'm coming in the tail end of the conversation.
Personally I think there should be a set of standard css classes.... something like...
Actually, Eric Meyers discussed this concept here: http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2004/06/26/structural-naming/
We actualy have a lot of these implemented in the CivicSpace Theme.
.bg-color-primary, .bg-color-compliment-1, .bg-color-compliment-2 .text-color-primary, .text-color-compliment-1, .text-color-compliment-2 .wrapper, .box, etc..
Someone with a better grasp of color theory, css, and drupal theming would probably be a better candidate for working that out...
I'm all for trying to stay within standards without trying to create our own proprietery Drupal naming scheme.
Then suggest to module developers where/how these default classes should be used, and to include a module-specific class in the class tag...
ie)
<div class='.box .box-$module'>
class=".box" ? I didn't know that was legal?
Trae
</div>
Along with encouraging heavy use of span and div in place of traditional html elements.
themes mailing list themes@drupal.org http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/themes
On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 13:20 -0500, Trae McCombs wrote:
Darrel O'Pry wrote:
<snip> > Well the idea of sensible is a consensus of whats right and a best > practices page :)... Not really a standard, but a set of suggested > guidelines would be very nice.
Right...
Not sure if this is really on topic, since I'm coming in the tail end of the conversation.
Personally I think there should be a set of standard css classes.... something like...
Actually, Eric Meyers discussed this concept here: http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2004/06/26/structural-naming/
We actualy have a lot of these implemented in the CivicSpace Theme.
.bg-color-primary, .bg-color-compliment-1, .bg-color-compliment-2 .text-color-primary, .text-color-compliment-1, .text-color-compliment-2 .wrapper, .box, etc..
Someone with a better grasp of color theory, css, and drupal theming would probably be a better candidate for working that out...
I'm all for trying to stay within standards without trying to create our own proprietery Drupal naming scheme.
Then suggest to module developers where/how these default classes should be used, and to include a module-specific class in the class tag...
ie)
<div class='.box .box-$module'>
class=".box" ? I didn't know that was legal?
opps wrong context..
Trae
Il giorno ven, 02/12/2005 alle 13.20 -0500, Trae McCombs ha scritto:
I'm all for trying to stay within standards without trying to create our own proprietery Drupal naming scheme.
What about using Microformats? http://www.microformats.org
-
Darrel O'Pry -
Egon Bianchet -
Trae McCombs