I was wondering if anyone had come across this.
I'm creating something that uses the same font across different divs, and as such, was going to put the font info into a mixin.
I've attached the code below, but my compiler doesn't seem to like it.
any help would be appreciated!
#mixin twinpeaksfont {
font-family: arial;
font-size: 80px;
padding-top: 30px;
color:#5e3a38;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 1.25px;
-webkit-text-stroke-color: #2ab650;
}
#title {
text-align: center;
h1 {
#include twinpeaksfont;
}
}
Maybe it wants the parenthesis?
#mixin twinpeaksfont() {
font-family: arial;
font-size: 80px;
padding-top: 30px;
color:#5e3a38;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 1.25px;
-webkit-text-stroke-color: #2ab650;
}
#title {
text-align: center;
h1 {
#include twinpeaksfont;
}
}
With or without the parenthesis, it's working at JSfiddle
Related
So I learn about OOCSS, I found it really helpful, but I'm having trouble of how much should I separate the component im working on, for example I have a button, I separate the color from the structure -easy-, but should I also separate the font size so I can create a button with different font size?, and also separate the color font?, and also the font weight?, I mean what is the limit? is the limit based on the things I'm gonna need?
If that is right, is the way I made the next badge correct?
This is in a context where my font color of the badges is always gonna be white
This is the way I was taught
.badge {
border-radius: 20px;
font-size: 2rem;
font-weight: 600;
padding: 0.5rem 2rem;
white-space: nowrap;
}
.badge-body-color {
background-color: #00d9ff;
color: white;/*this one*/
}
.badge-normal-color {
background-color: #02cdf1;
color: white;/*this one*/
}
This is the way I did it
.badge {
border-radius: 20px;
font-size: 2rem;
font-weight: 600;
padding: 0.5rem 2rem;
white-space: nowrap;
color: white;/*here is the change*/
}
.badge-small {
font-size: 1.6rem;
}
.badge-body-color {
background-color: #00d9ff;
}
.badge-normal-color {
background-color: #02cdf1;
}
Is it wrong because I put the color inside the structure?
I have a html table with table headings in a Netsuite advanced PDF Template. For some reason one of headings has the word with extra spacing in between the letters, so instead of printing
Delivery
Address
for the header it prints
D e l i v e r y
Address
The Address part does not get the extra spaces.
The code for the header is:
<table class="itemtable" style="width: 100%;"><!-- start items --><#list record.item as item><#if item_index==0>
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3">Delivery Address</th>
I have looked at css properties like word-break, letter-spacing, etc.; but I can't find anything that seem appropriate to fix this.
Anybody know why this is happening? This does not happen in an html page with the same code, so not sure why this is happening in Netsuite.
The css is:
table {
font-size: 9pt;
table-layout: fixed;
}
th {
font-weight: bold;
font-size: 8pt;
vertical-align: middle;
padding: 5px 6px 3px;
background-color: #e3e3e3;
color: #333333;
}
td {
padding: 4px 6px;
}
td p { align:left }
b {
font-weight: bold;
color: #333333;
}
table.header td {
padding: 0;
font-size: 10pt;
}
table.footer td {
padding: 0;
font-size: 8pt;
}
table.itemtable th {
padding-bottom: 10px;
padding-top: 10px;
}
table.body td {
padding-top: 2px;
}
table.total {
page-break-inside: avoid;
}
tr.totalrow {
background-color: #e3e3e3;
line-height: 200%;
}
td.totalboxtop {
font-size: 12pt;
background-color: #e3e3e3;
}
td.addressheader {
font-size: 8pt;
padding-top: 6px;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}
td.address {
padding-top: 0;
}
td.totalboxmid {
font-size: 28pt;
padding-top: 20px;
background-color: #e3e3e3;
}
td.totalboxbot {
background-color: #e3e3e3;
font-weight: bold;
}
span.title {
font-size: 28pt;
}
span.number {
font-size: 16pt;
}
span.itemname {
font-weight: bold;
line-height: 150%;
}
hr {
width: 100%;
color: #d3d3d3;
background-color: #d3d3d3;
height: 1px;
}
.synb {
font-weight: bold;
}
.synh7 {
font-size: 10pt;
line-height: 120%;
}
.synh9 {
font-size: 8pt;
line-height: 120%;
}
tr.synbordertop td {
border-top: 1pt solid black;
}
span.syntitle {
font-size: 20pt;
}
span.synnumber {
font-size: 13pt;
}
EDIT:
Netsuite uses BFO with these PDFs. See the following regarding this specific issue: https://bfo.com/support/faq/#31
How can I stop the letters in my table from being stretched out?
By default the text in tables is justified. In order to prevent this
you need to set align="left". Remember that each element has a
<p> implicitly placed around the data, so the best way to achieve
this is to use a style sheet and add:
td p { align:left }
which will cause all the table data elements to align to the left.
I've had this same issue before. It seems to be an issue exclusively with Netsuite's rendering of the PDF.
Here's the code I implemented to fix it:
Netsuite/HTML
<th><p style="align: center;">Color</p></th>
CSS:
td {
text-align: left;
padding: 2px;
}
th {
padding: 2px;
}
Here's how it looks without the center align:
Here's how it looks with the center:
I'm sure it's not the most ideal situation, but this is the only way I was able to get it to work, I'm sure I tried many of the same things you did.
I used the information in this link for further reference:
"This article is relevant if you are working with NetSuite Advanced
PDF Templates, and you are encountering an unusual HTML table
cell alignment effect in the generated PDF."
http://blog.prolecto.com/2016/03/18/netsuite-advanced-pdf-templates-how-to-fix-table-cell-alignment-justification-anomaly/
Hope this helps, it's at least the solution I implemented whenever I ran into a similar issue.
I have this code:
#include component(elementList) {
tr {
td {
width: 50%;
background: $darkGray;
padding: 5px;
text-align: center;
}
#include option(heading) {
padding: 5px;
background: #eeeeee;
text-align: center;
font-family: 'Quicksand', sans-serif;
}
}
}
It's just a table. And every row should have a dark background (which is saved in $darkGray), except for those rows with an option --heading set. Those should have a bright background.
But in my browsers, all rows are in the dark color. I also tried !important inside of the option.
Any ideas?
Thank you guys
PS: I am using CSStyle with SASS.
Think this is a scoping issue. You use the dark background on table cells, while you're using the bright background on rows. So no matter which option the row has, its contained cells are dark.
This should work (untested and never used CSStyle)
#include component(elementList) {
tr {
td {
width: 50%;
background: $darkGray;
padding: 5px;
text-align: center;
}
#include option(heading) {
td {
padding: 5px;
background: #eeeeee;
text-align: center;
font-family: 'Quicksand', sans-serif;
}
}
}
}
I've got the following CSS:
#extra-info .warning { color: #c33; }
#extra-info .warning, .created-link { font-size: 12px; margin-right: 4px; text-transform: uppercase; }
I'd like to convert it to Sass 3.3.10. I tried the following:
#extra-info .warning {
color: #c33;
&, #at-root .created-link { font-size: 12px; margin-right: 4px; text-transform: uppercase; }
}
However, this gave me the following error:
Sass::SyntaxError: Invalid CSS after " &, ": expected "{", was "#at-root .creat..."
How can I fix this?
I'm not sure why you need to use #at-root in this particular case, but you can write it this way:
#extra-info .warning{
/* Use #extend directive, because it's designed specifically for this.*/
#extend .created-link;
color: #c33;
#at-root .created-link{
font-size: 12px;
margin-right: 4px;
text-transform: uppercase;
}
}
Or more simple way just to write this in the separate blocks:
#extra-info .warning{
#extend .created-link; /*some*/
color: #c33;
}
.created-link{
font-size: 12px;
margin-right: 4px;
text-transform: uppercase;
}
First example more consistent with the notion 'SASS way' I think.
Have a good day.
I'm currently working on a team that uses SASS. I see that we are extending styles that are very simple and to me I don't see the benefit of doing this. Am I missing something?
Here are some examples of a _Common.scss that is imported and used throughout other sass files:
.visibility-hidden{visibility: hidden;}
.display-inline { display: inline; }
.display-inline-block { display: inline-block; }
.display-block { display: block; }
.display-none { display: none; }
.display-box { display: box; }
.float-left { float: left; }
.float-right { float: right; }
.clear-both { clear: both; }
.width-percent-100 { width: 100%; }
.width-percent-65 { width: 65%; }
.width-percent-50 { width: 50%; }
.width-percent-45 { width: 45%; }
.width-percent-40 { width: 40%; }
.width-percent-33 { width: 33%; }
.width-percent-30 { width: 30%; }
.width-percent-20 { width: 20%; }
.height-percent-100 { height: 100%; }
.cursor-pointer { cursor: pointer; }
.underline { text-decoration: underline; }
.text-decoration-none { text-decoration: none; }
.bold { font-weight: bold; }
.font-weight-normal { font-weight: normal; }
.text-align-center { text-align: center; }
.text-align-left { text-align: left; }
.text-align-right { text-align: right; }
.font-10 { font-size: 10px; }
.font-11 { font-size: 11px; }
.font-12 { font-size: 12px; }
.font-13 { font-size: 13px; }
.font-14 { font-size: 14px; }
.font-15 { font-size: 15px; }
.font-16 { font-size: 16px; }
.font-17 { font-size: 17px; }
.font-18 { font-size: 18px; }
.font-percent-65 { font-size: 65%; }
.font-percent-80 { font-size: 80%; }
.font-percent-90 { font-size: 90%; }
.font-percent-100 { font-size: 100%; }
.font-percent-110 { font-size: 110%; }
.font-percent-120 { font-size: 120%; }
.font-percent-130 { font-size: 130%; }
.font-percent-140 { font-size: 140%; }
.font-percent-150 { font-size: 150%; }
.font-percent-160 { font-size: 160%; }
.font-percent-170 { font-size: 170%; }
.font-percent-180 { font-size: 180%; }
Example:
#CategoriesContainer
{
ul{
li{
&:first-child{
#extend .font-11;
}
a
{
#extend .font-11;
#extend .text-decoration-none;
}
}
}
}
You should only use extend when you have a certain attribute set that will be used multiple times. The sheer stupidy of extending a class with a class with one attribute that has the unit value worked into the name of it is incomprehensible.
A better example for a reason to extend can be found in the reference guide
Say we have 2 classes
.error {
border: 1px #f00;
background-color: #fdd;
}
.seriousError {
border-width: 3px;
}
.error is a general no interesting style but a serious error should be really clear.
.seriousError is created to thicken the line, the only problem is that now we have to use both classes in the html to combine the styles.
Because we're lazy and just want to use one class and not duplicate code that might be changed in the future we can extend .seriousError with .error
.seriousError {
#extend .error;
border-width: 3px;
}
Now we didn't duplicate the code in our sass file but did get the right styles on the page.
Check out the reference guide for more/better examples.
Just please for the sake of kittens stop extending classes with one attribute classes. And don't implicitly state the value/attributes in the selector, thats not very semantic.
You, and your team, should read this post which explains a few problems with the aproach you take here vs semantic code. Couldn't find a better tuned post this quick.
You aren't missing anything, this is just bloated code in poor form and not a great way to extend classes.
There is maybe one (bad) reason I can imagine why this would be used. If for example .font-10 needs to be .7em instead of 10px, it can be easily changed - but then you've just defeated the point of naming the class "font10". Something like small-font would even make more sense in that case (and I'm not suggesting you use that either).
I won't discuss the merits of semantic class names and the folly of presentational ones (especially as literal as these are), but I will suggest that this is a very narrow use of extending classes. With a 1:1 mapping of class name to property/value, you've practically defeated the purpose of #extend, which is supposed to make you write less CSS.
Better example of what to use #extend for:
.media {
padding:1em;
border-color:blue;
background-color:red;
clear:left;
}
.my-media {
#extend .media;
background-color:green;
}
Atomic CSS
The technique of very simple CSS rules does have a bit of precedent - at Yahoo! they call it Atomic CSS. Thierry Koblentz argues in this Smashing Magazine article for using the simple classes directly in your markup, similar to inline styling. This can be helpful on very large projects across multiple web properties, where styles are not consistent. Base styles for OOCSS components can't be reused as much in such a situation, causing you to have to write many more lines of extension classes or overrides.
The downside is, of course, as Wesley mentioned, that it is much more difficult to make changes across your entire project's styles, such as updating the text size of a specific selector.
I've been playing around with a variant of this technique recently in a fairly large project, where styles can often be one-off. In an effort to avoid the I try to avoid putting hard values directly in the selectors. For instance, the following css (example fiddle):
_colors.scss
.text-white {
color: $white;
}
.blue {
#extend .text-white;
background: $blue;
}
_effects.scss
.circle {
width: 50px;
height: 50px;
border-radius: 50%;
text-align: center;
line-height: 50px;
font-size: 40px;
}
.matted {
border: 4px solid $white;
}
.shadow {
#include box-shadow(0 1px 4px 1px rgba($black, 0.25));
}
HTML:
<div class="blue matted circle shadow">?</div>
Specificity issues
One last thing to keep in mind if you decide to use this technique - it can cause specificity problems if you're extending base-level classes that use the same CSS properties. For instance, in the following example (fiddle), how would your border-radius appear? You wanted the top to be squared off (no border-radius) but this isn't happening, because the .circle class is further down in your css and just as specific (single class) as the other effects. This is a bit of a contrived example, but if you reuse CSS properties across your atomic selectors, this can be a real problem.
_colors.scss
.text-white {
color: white;
}
.blue {
#extend .text-white;
background: royalblue;
}
_effects.scss
.squared-top {
border-top-left-radius: 0;
border-top-right-radius: 0;
}
.rounded {
border-radius: 10px;
}
.circle {
width: 50px;
height: 50px;
border-radius: 50%;
}
HTML:
<span class="circle blue rounded squared-top"></span>
If you do it that way you can also use it directly in the HTML - so it looks like they took the OOCSS path and because it's already in the CSS you can now also extend to it. Very flexible but it could also turn very messy.
Extend option is used poorly here. It should be used for extending classes with more content and in that case extend can be very helpful.You can find more about extend and its options here.