Yes, adding -theme=src/main.css seems to get rid of the offending css. Thanks. From: Alex Harui<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 1:55 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: Component Conflicts redux
The CSS referenced appears to be in the Basic theme, not the Basic SWC. Did you try using a different theme? -Alex On 12/15/19, 1:09 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]> wrote: Well, others are in the same problem using excluded css hack. You're ok since you're using specifically the UI Set that is in the library that all other UI sets must use ;) Anyway, I thought all the fixes in the compiler discussed was already in place. El dom., 15 dic. 2019 a las 19:36, Harbs (<[email protected]>) escribió: > I think we spoke about fixing this in the compiler. Moving Basic to a > separate library would not solve this case because I’m actually using Basic. > > > On Dec 15, 2019, at 8:15 PM, Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Harbs, > > > > I think we should move Basic components along with its CSS to its own > > library. The same as we need to separate MXRoyale/SparkRoyale from > > HTTPSerice, RemoteObject or Validator (to say something) and other "non > > visual classes". I started the latter effort some months ago as we > > discussed in list, but I must left since I runned out of time to that > > at the moment, and was no easy task to do, but hope to separate in libs > one > > day. > > > > Aboutt Basic: Actualy Basic lib should have just the code that is needed > > for the rest of UI Sets, but not an UI Set that some people will never > use. > > I mean mainly TLCs and its CSS defs. > > > > Since we have Jewel UI Set, MDL UI Set, Express UI Set, I think Basic > > should be the name of the library and have another name for the > > common/foundation code for the rest of UI Sets. My proposal is to call > it : > > Foundation.swc or Common.swc > > > > In the meantime you can use the "exclude css hack". But that shouldn't be > > the final goal (as I said is just a hack), just a way to jump over the > > problem for now. I had this on an app that uses MXRoyale just for > > RemoteObject communication and some validators and other utility classes. > > Without that the styles are messed between Jewel and MXRoyale. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Carlos > > > > > > > > > > > > El dom., 15 dic. 2019 a las 12:47, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > escribió: > > > >> We just ran into the problem of components stepping on each other again. > >> > >> We have both a Basic Button and a Button from another component set in > our > >> app. Basic css causes the following css to be written: > >> > >> Button { > >> background-color: #f8f8f8; > >> border-radius: 2px; > >> border: 1px solid #808080; > >> margin: 0px; > >> padding: 4px; > >> } > >> > >> > >> Button:hover { > >> background-color: #e8e8e8; > >> border: 1px solid #808080; > >> padding: 4px; > >> } > >> > >> > >> Button:active { > >> background-color: #d8d8d8; > >> border: 1px solid #808080; > >> padding: 4px; > >> } > >> > >> > >> Considering these are selector css rather than class CSS, the css is > >> changing the default css for our components which are set using class > names. > >> > >> We’ve discussed this problem in the past and I’m not sure what the end > >> plan (which was never implemented) was… > >> > >> FWIW, we’re changing the styling in our app, and we’re probably getting > >> rid of basic buttons completely, but it’s going to be a process… > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> Harbs > > > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86e6ab4e3a09494c7c7a08d781a303f5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637120409456302974&sdata=zMVuCTdcerw7dSGN1B86dhwVI%2F6oTYm%2Fa2X6jwy8AfY%3D&reserved=0 > > -- Carlos Rovira https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86e6ab4e3a09494c7c7a08d781a303f5%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637120409456302974&sdata=zMVuCTdcerw7dSGN1B86dhwVI%2F6oTYm%2Fa2X6jwy8AfY%3D&reserved=0
