There is of course the multiple-class IE6 issue, but that has been solved http://sonspring.com/index.php?id=102
And by using CSS more efficiently - these sass-mixins don't make much sense. Sure they can (probably) help a little bit in bringing some order to a super-messy CSS, but the same can probably be done with a little bit of refactoring. Regards, - evgeny On 6/7/07, Hampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, then in this instance, I'd just wrap it all in something called > common.... and just style 4 to override that. > > .common > .one > .two > .three > .four > :override-shit > > -hampton. > > On 6/6/07, twifkak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 6, 3:02 am, Evgeny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why not use two classes for an element? > > > > 'Cause that pollutes the HTML, and because it doesn't scale when you > > want to go past one level of abstraction. Say you have: > > > > <div class="one common"/> > > <div class="two common"/> > > <div class="three even-more-common"/> > > <div class="four"/> > > > > And you realize that all .common need .even-more-common, as well. > > > > (Having, yet again, failed to snip some *real* code from work...) > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
