Hi
2018-06-06 18:37 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
> Harbs is proposing that, like border-box, we apply position:relative to
> all elements in the DOM. My understanding is that you can do that via:
>
> .Application * {
> position: relative;
> }
>
> If it has zero impact on Jewel's use of flexbox then I think it is safe to
> use. I just want to make sure folks won't be wanting to turn that off at
> some point.
>
I tried this in Jewel _global.sass:
j|Application *, .royale *, .royale *:before, .royale *:after
box-sizing: border-box
position: relative
And all works as before (tested with JewelExample in all browsers). if this
is the change, it seems to not affect what we have in Jewel right now.
> Another area of concern is in encapsulating existing DOM patterns. When
> folks want to make existing JS frameworks work in Royale, they may want to
> copy code from those JS frameworks and wrap them in Royale classes. But if
> the code they borrow did not assume that all elements had
> position:relative, the copied code may not work correctly. That's why the
> application of PAYG principles, IMO, is to only apply it to the parent
> containers that need it, even though that runs a bit more code to do that.
> Setting position:relative "just-in-case" someone needs to use x,y is not
> PAYG, IMO.
>
>
In this point I don't have exactly a position. I think positioning is
something at the core of how things work, is not part of something we can
plug or not like a theme. So I think if I set up Jewel to work with
flexbox...I think Jewel will be attached to flexbox from now on. If in
basic you can rely on absolute or relative, this is something to look now
since soon it will be almost impossible to change. If it should be absolute
or relative? I didn't investigate what's better. Absolute seems more PAYG
than relative, but if that generate more problems, in the rest of things
attached in the application, maybe the solution here is not to go as PAYG.
We should take into account that although we want PAYG philoshopy maybe not
always we can stick to that and sometimes is better other options. maybe we
end with PAYG 98% of the times and other solution 2% of the time. For me
this is good, since we can differentiate when other options is better and
avoid to think that since we have a hammer all things are nails. I think I
can't say much more for this concrete point.
thanks
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
>
>
