If I would want an Vertical layout which do not affect as much your
children - I would create set of layouts beads which applies FlexBox rules
or Grid rules to the children. The things is that I would do this the same
way - by inline styles instead of css classes.
Why ? Look into my previous statement.

Thanks, Piotr

2018-03-12 18:11 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>:

> HI Alex
>
> 2018-03-12 17:02 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>
> > 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.
> >
>
> ok, I'm trying to do that right now. I'll let you know as I get a something
> working.
>
>
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
> that's the side effect of inline styling, as I put the button inside a
> vertical layout, the layout imposes display: block
> while my css dictates display: inline-block. The browser shows the later
> strikes out. For me that behavior can be right
> if I can change easily from CSS overriding rule, but not if is a line of
> code inside a framework that makes me override a whole class
> to change an inline style.
>
> thanks!
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/12/18, 3:44 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> Rovira"
> > <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> 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 <carlosrov...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> 2018-03-12 11:29 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> 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
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>



-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*

Reply via email to