|
|
|
|
|
by jonmc12
5348 days ago
|
|
Recently I walked into project that used Twitter bootstrap for the initial CSS. A prototype was built, relying on the bootstrap CSS, and from that point on it has been hassle to work with the CSS. I'm really not sure I understand the strategy of dumping so many styles into the global name space. Basically, all of us have been working around the styling as we implement features.. a major refactor is in order and we will likely be ditching bootstrap. Just a warning if you plan to build beyond the styles provided by bootstrap, it is not straightforward. Really, the entire set of styles should be contained within its own namespace or some other meaningful semantic convention. Am I missing something? What is intended after 'boot'? am I really supposed to replace these global styles manually? |
|
Using a framework favors convention over configuration for the benefit of speed.
I especially like it because the team has a central set of documentation for the UI to use - that means if we override a style, if they followed the convention, everything works out better.
I do agree using a namespace would help though.