Awesome! I completely agree with the policy to simplify CSS. I guess the policy may be also realized by providing a set of functions in a manner of `rtfeldman/elm-css`'s `Mixin`s. What is the dominant benefits of making another library rather than providing set of `rtfeldman/elm-css` `Mixin`s?
On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 10:20:14 PM UTC+9, Matthew Griffith wrote: > > > It's easy to write valid CSS that is still broken and frustrating. What if > we could make frustrating CSS styles not expressible? > > I've been working on an experimental style library for making styles that > are harder to break and easier to use. > > There is also support for flow/flexbox style layouts, animations, > transitions, and media queries. > > It takes a different approach on attaching styles to html nodes. Instead > of using classes and ids, you create collections of styled html elements to > pull from to build your view (with support for classList style variations > that can be turned on/off). > > Let me know your thoughts! > > Note: I haven't published this on elm-package yet as I wanted to see if > there was any feedback that might alter what 1.0 looks like. > > The Style Elements library <https://github.com/mdgriffith/style-elements> > > Simple Example > <https://github.com/mdgriffith/elm-style-elements-simple-example> > > Complex Example > <https://github.com/mdgriffith/elm-style-elements-complex-example> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
