Again its personal choice. I am sure there are people who wouldnt do things the way you do them.
_____ From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CyberAngel Sent: Saturday, 6 December 2008 7:26 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CSS question Steve, Nobody can disagree with what you are saying, but if you only need the Mini to get to point B. Why would you waste more money driving a yank tank? The point is that frameworks as you clearly have pointed out have the benefit, that you know it will work on all major browsers. However I do not agree that one should use it for one small facet of the framework. That was what I wanted to highlight. From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Onnis Sent: Friday, 5 December 2008 11:06 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CSS question i guess for ease of use. why do some people use dreamweaver instead of write the code? because for some people its easier. For example to do what i need to do all i need to do is this (example only) $$("a").each( function (e) { if (e.getElement("img")) { e.addClass("no-border"); } } ) When you look at that, for you to do the same thing without the framework would be quite a lot more work. When it comes to js libraries, you can be pretty safe that its going to work in most browsers as it has been tested in most of them. The documentation usualy states what browsers it has been tested in so thats a start, you get the cross platform reliability. Sooooo many times i still see people use document.all in their javascript because thats all they know so stuff breaks. _____ From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CyberAngel Sent: Friday, 5 December 2008 10:52 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CSS question Steve I wasn't referring to you, one thing that annoys me when developers come across a framework and make a suggestion is that these people tend to think you may have a use for it all over what you are doing. It is a personal opinion NOT to fall into that category, and NOT introduce something that is only going to be used for one thing. It isn't hard to write code to change attributes or even the class name to change a style on the fly, and you don't need a framework loaded to achieve this with any extra overheads that aren't needed. So the question still remains.. Why introduce something to the site that is overkill for one or two things? From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Onnis Sent: Friday, 5 December 2008 10:10 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CSS question I am using mootools all over the site so thats not a problem _____ From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CyberAngel Sent: Friday, 5 December 2008 2:11 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CSS question You could, but why introduce a framework to use it for one thing? From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Pepperman Sent: Monday, 1 December 2008 12:51 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CSS question You can use jquery with mootools. http://docs.jquery.com/Using_jQuery_with_Other_Libraries -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- <BR --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
