[sunami-ai]

My view is that those who designed CSS suck when it comes to designing intuitive systems.

I would not advocate constraint solvers, in the future I hope ViTs are so cheap to run that they can infer the right layout of things at any orientation and size in single digit milliseconds, solving the layout problem for good =)

[CharlieDigital]

I don't know if I've got it wrong in my head, but at some point it occurred to me that CSS is basically SQL for DOM.

The reason CSS is hard is the same reason that SQL is hard for some.

But I like SQL so I kinda like CSS.

[ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7]

> I don't know if I've got it wrong in my head, but at some point it occurred to me that CSS is basically SQL for DOM.

Why? Because it has syntax you despise or what? The syntax (nor semantics of said syntax) is nothing like SQL.

I feel like people who say things like this are just trying to say anything, and it is meaningless. Do you have a take on that?

[CharlieDigital]

I love CSS and I love SQL.

Both are declarative query languages over sets and paths.

Except the object with CSS isn't to extract a value, but to apply values (styles).

[robocat]

[flagged]

[dang]

Please don't respond to a bad comment, or one you feel is bad, by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes everything worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[blululu]

Agreed that there is no need to be a jerk on this discussion. The points you make are generally true in the abstract, but we are talking about CSS here which really is one of the most convoluted and confusing pieces of UI software out there. And the problems are not cruft from success and time: the core parts of the spec are terrible and confusing. The basic idea of a Cascade is a bad idea for a variety of reasons and nobody uses this feature if they can avoid it. The over all layout spec is really convoluted and requires you to figure out the difference between absolute and fixed position and top vs bottom. (Making a horizontal row of images is shockingly difficult). There is also a whole system of units for "absolute length" that are defined in relation to the inch (including the terribly named pixel which is 1/96th of an inch (inches being defined for printers but not for screens). These are issues were all features of the very first release. The later updates have provided alternatives, but the core spec sets people up to fail.

[robocat]

It is so easy to look backwards and imagine a better world and then moan about imperfections. You can do that with absolutely any technology.

Most of your complaints have been solved, or there are best practices that avoid the downsides.

> Cascade is a bad idea for a variety of reasons

CSS is fucking genius. It is flexible enough that we have solutions that avoid the problems. I love the idea of an alternate universe where we do a redesign: but personally I'm very unfond of some of the (now rightly dead) systems designed to "fix" CSS.

> The over all layout spec is really convoluted

The domain is difficult: we just think it could be simplified because we are given CSS and so we think we could improve upon it.

> absolute

Don't use it. It's a bad design smell. Rarely needed in a few corner cases. A nightmare before getBoundingClientRect() was reliably usable (a decade ago)

> fixed position

Is damn fucking awesome! I developed butter smooth fixed/sticky positioning that worked in IE5.5 to IE11 using absolute instead. I developed a zero-jank fixed position feature in IE but there were insanely complex requirements (global order of events with DOM updates plus needs extremely complex techniques to deal with viewport scrollbars - only a stubborn idiot engineer like me would attempt to yak shave it but I solved it).

fixed positioning was hell in early iOS (broken zoom, broken events, broken inputs, jankyness, scrolled offscreen). Let's not talk about early Android browsers. Arrrgh fixed positioning (and everything else) was broken in Edge (Spartan/Legacy). Yet fixed positioning is a critical feature for mobile screens - a major new feature that CSS managed to embrace.

> Making a horizontal row of images is shockingly difficult)

That's what a <table> was for. Many people searched for difficult solutions: no surprise that they had troubles of their own making. Now solved in more flexible ways with modern CSS layout features (there's that amazingly flexible capability of CSS to absorb new features again!)

> units for "absolute length" These are issues were all features of the very first release.

Which was used because we didn't have modern high resolution screens. Layout units are just extremely difficult (demonstrated by the variety of different units we now have - made available by more powerful computers).

It is just too easy to use 20/20 hindsight to criticise every historical decision.

I feel your pain: I dealt with every quirk in every browser for far too many years.

It is healthier to thank the people that worked on the specifications: awesome technology that is astonishingly flexible (and quite frankly amazingly backwards compatible). Yes, you need to learn how to use the features. No, that isn't a problem. Most anti-features can now be ignored when developing a greenfield site.

I'm extremely thankful that I never have to make a page work on IE (or many other now obsolete browsers) ever again.

There are a huge list of awful gremlins in CSS you didn't mention - luckily most developers can avoid the nastiest of them (zoom: 1; to fix layout?). There are also some truly inspiring CSS features: declarative transitions and animation seem like magic to me (complex, but deliver amazing results) with hidden risks of course: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43259722

I guess CSS is the worst form of layout language except for all the others that have been tried.

[sunami-ai]

[flagged]

[dang]

Please don't respond to a bad comment, or one you feel is bad, by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes everything worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: you've unfortunately been breaking the site guidelines so badly with this account that I think we have to ban it as well. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43350269.