Does a css class selector always require a definition? For example, if you found in the html: div class="banner", should you always find a .banner in a css file? I ask this question as I've been looking at some website themes and I sometimes find these selectors without any other reference. I'm just not sure if it's an oversight or something common.
There are many reasons to have class names on your HTML elements without having CSS rules associated with them. A couple of examples:
More readable markup. If a component is properly labeled, it's easier to find, debug, or work collaboratively on.
Javascript. Sometimes an element requires some Javascript behaviors, but doesn't inherently need CSS styling itself.
So to answer your question: No, you do not need to define each class or selector in your CSS.
Related
This question already has answers here:
What is the difference between id and class in CSS, and when should I use them? [duplicate]
(15 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
So I often use a website LiveWeave.com to test HTML, CSS, and JavaScript code that I've written. It has a syntax checker, and whenever I use an ID as a selector in the CSS section, it says that it is improper to use an ID as a selector.
I have demonstrated it in this Weaver. To the right of line three in the CSS window is a yellow icon, which, when hovered over, says that it is improper to use IDs as a selector. I was under the impression that that is specifically for the purpose of being used as a selector for a single DOM element, as opposed to classes, which are designed to be applied to multiple DOM elements.
Am I wrong? IS it improper to use an ID as a selector?
The only other instance I can think of an ID being used is for JavaScript document.getElementById(), and similar functions. What is the proper use of an ID?
Note that I am NOT asking the difference between an ID and a Class, but rather whether it is proper to use an ID as a selector.
Using an ID is the most efficient way of selecting a DOM node in both CSS and Javascript. I personally like to use classes for all repeated items and ids for unique items, or unique configurations of repeated modules. There are many CSS patterns, I use a style called BEM (Block, Element, Modifier as seen here) which is a class based naming convention. Look at your favorite websites, right click or inspect. You will find that there is no one right answer to your question, only many right answers.
May I also say that both exist in the standard for a reason and serve a purpose depending on your applications needs.
Below is the order of efficiency for selectors. IDs are the most efficient and pseudo classes and pseudo elements are the least efficient.
id (#myid)
class (.myclass)
tag (div, h1, p)
adjacent sibling (h1 + p)
child (ul > li)
descendent (li a)
universal (*)
attribute (a[rel=”external”])
pseudo-class and pseudo element (a:hover, li:first)
See here...
It is not improper to use ID's as selectors, so long as the ID being used corresponds to only one element in the DOM (document object model).
If you'd like a selector that is multi-purpose, and able to be applied to multiple elements in the DOM, use a class. Although I'm sure you knew that.
The main reason ID's are frowned upon by some CSS developers, and full stack designers, is simply because they aren't as versatile and they have a higher specificity than classes, which can either help or hinder development (based on CSS knowledge).
For more information on CSS specificity, read here: https://css-tricks.com/specifics-on-css-specificity/
It's valid, it's just considered bad practice by some developers because it can make it difficult to maintain your CSS if you're not disciplined about it. I'm no expert on CSS but I'm pretty sure it's all to do with #'s having a really high specificity rating and if you have them dotted around your CSS files it makes it difficult to manage the cascade i.e. inheritance of style rules. So it's considered best by some to use IDs only for referencing elements in your JavaScript.
I've actually heard this argument before.
Some people push the idea of using solely classes for pure css stuff and keeping id for javascript and other id specific functionality.
It would seem that website follows that ideology, so they are trying to get their users to adopt it. I'm not sure if it is yet best practice to keep id out of css
You can decide for yourself whether an id is worth using, when you could just use a class instead.
If you used an ID as a selector and your using it in your Javascript too then you could make situation where if you decide to rename it then you've created a dependency that wouldn't be there if you had used a class name in your CSS.
Also, though using the ID is faster, it isn't faster if you then use #text a - since CSS reads right to left and has to check all the anchor elements first and then find the one with the ID of #text.
This also means the style isn't reusable and you can't use multiple classes either.
So I think the answer really is, based on all the pros and cons of using an ID as the selector, the best practice to keep you out of possible future problems is to not do it. Of course, this all really depends on how you code, the scope of the project and how many other people are working in the project. It's not against the rules, just not really best practice due to possible issues you might be building in that could bite you later.
On top of what has already been mentioned, even in CSS, ID's can be useful depending on what is the structural design.
For example; if every page in your website requires a header and a footer, I don't see why it would not be useful to make it an id.
What is wrong with doing:
#header {}
#footer {}
If you know for sure that your page has only one header and one footer, I don't see the point in using a class.
Mentioning the id is very specific and the page structure is undubious in this case.
Moreover, I also don't see what is wrong by doing something for example like:
.menu{}
#header .menu li{}
#footer .menu li{}
To add specific styling depending on the page segment. Seems very legit to me.
Ultimately, I even think that using ID's to indicate page sections might be more beneficial by ´knowing´ that they are unique (although they might be recurrent across different pages).
Reading an id in a CSS file should give the CSS designer the benefit of immediately knowing what page segment the following css rules are referring to.
A sheet with only classes would in that case seem less clear than using ID's imo.
I'd like to get opinions if this plan is worthwhile or not.
I have an existing site, and some elements have a CSS class defined.
I thought I would append each element that has a class with a new class:
<div class="existingClass">
would turn into:
<div class="existingClass newClass">
Then, if I want to override any attributes in "existingClass", I would do so in "newClass" (because the last class attributes are taken?).
I figure this way, nothing would break, so I do not risk anything because I am not removing "existingClass".
Any problems with this plan?
First know what is in the existingClass. Write newClass in such a manner that it won't break the layout. For knowing what is in the existingClass use tools like firebug to save time.
Indeed this seems to be a good approach, if you don't want to mess editing the already written CSS.
What you must master are CSS precedence rules, also known as CSS specificity.
Some good articles about it:
Specifics on CSS Specificity.
CSS Specificity: Things You Should Know
This is important because when you want to change a style, that chance will be visible only if you follow appropriately those guidelines. If you don't, then you'll face some troubles when rendering your page.
This is a long shot, but is there a tool available that optimizes CSS selectors by removing unneeded specificity?
I find that when I write CSS, I deliberately make my selectors more specific than necessary to avoid conflicts and for quasi-documentation.
It would be great if there were a tool that could analyze a given group of rules, determine their "uniqueness" in terms of overlap with other rules, and then strip away any unnecessary specificity.
I can't even begin to imagine how a tool developer would approach all of the scenarios this would require, but I've been blown away by others' ingenuities in this area before and figured it was worth asking.
Update:
I've added a bounty to this question, and the more I think about it, the more I realize how valuable a CSS Specificity Filter would be.
For example, when working with Nested Rules/Selectors in Sass and LESS, excessive nesting is a common and well-known antipattern that can easily lead to overly specific selectors.
There's a good illustration of this in the excellent TutsPlus course Maintainable CSS with Sass and Compass:
body {
div.container {
p {
a {
color: purple;
}
}
}
}
Sass will follow these nesting instructions and produce the following CSS output, raising no objection to any unneeded specificity:
body div.container p a {
color: purple;
}
If a Specificity Filter did/does exist, however, it would create potential benefits for CSS developers:
You could organize your stylesheets as a 1:1 mapping of the DOM, similar to what you see when you examine style rules in Firebug and Chrome Dev Tools. A smart editor/IDE could auto-populate styles for DOM elements with shared styles/classes. That redundancy would then, of course, be filtered out by the Specificity Filter/Optimizer.
Stylesheets could have their structure pre-populated by a tool that scans the DOM and translates it to CSS selectors/rules. This means a developer would only need to update the HTML; the CSS "tree" would be kept in sync to reflect the current state of the DOM. A smart editor would let you jump to the CSS definition for an element/class for styling -- or even make its style rules visible in a separate panel.
In a way, this almost seems like a step backward - like a feature you'd find in Dreamweaver or WebAssist to help newbs learn CSS. But the basic idea of a CSS selector optimization tool seems like a no brainer, and the type of workflow automation I've described would be the logical next step -- and the catalyst would be the Specificity Filter.
I looked into some of the better-known CSS editors and web IDEs, but haven't found anything offering this type of functionality beyond targeting a single element and generating a selector for it.
Update 2: CSS Selector Performance
In response to Spliff's comment, here are two great articles on CSS selector performance:
Performance Impact of CSS Selectors by Steve Souders
Efficiently Rendering CSS by Chris Coyier
Both agree that micro-optimizing CSS isn't worth the effort, but that over-qualified descendant selectors are "an efficiency disaster." I haven't benchmarked yet myself, but suspect that the kind of "DOM Mapping" approach I'm suggesting would cause a performance hit without an optimization step, either manual or automated.
Related Questions, Links, and Tools:
Points in CSS Specificity
Tool to See CSS Specificity
Tool for Cleaning Up CSS
Order by CSS Specificity
Top 5 Mistakes of Massive CSS
Google: Efficient CSS Selectors
Procssor
Clean CSS
CSS Tidy
You could attempt to take a different approach, try to write your selectors as small (low specificity) as possible. and only make them more specific when needed.
With that way of working you don't need a tool.
Just going to throw this out there-- it doesn't 'answer' your question,but it's a tool I like to spread the word about for people who do a lot of css programming: Firebug.
If you're not familiar with it, it's a tool for web browsers. You pull up your page once it's installed, right click and select 'Inspect Element.' It will show you all css affecting different elements on your page, and is useful for creating clean, precise css code. Also it makes it easier to see instant updates on what your page would look like with slight modifications. It will inform you of useless css code that's being overridden by other css code.
ALSO! Firebug now is available for almost all browsers. Not just Firefox. Personally, I'm partial to using it in Chrome.
We really can't do without specificity because it is the only thing that saves you when you have two or more rules colliding. Specificity brings sanity to the whole jumbled CSS rule, so it is more of a blessing than curse. Some of the stuff you talked about, like the CSS selector, can be done using Firefox/Firebug. I'm more disturbed by browser compatibility.
Actually there's a way you can do this using HTML5 and CSS3. The standard technique is to specify elements using the HTML 5 attribute "data-" and then do CSS selection for this attribute. This isn't the purpose of the attributes, but you can customly specify some elements that you can use to even switch the theme of a site.
So, for example, you can end up creating your specificity filters manually in CSS, by specifying
<b data-specificity=2>test</b>
where data-specificity only matches to parents above.
UPDATE:
Alright, so for example, let's say you have a paragraph class, but you want to specify which parent, or how many parents the paragraph can inherit properties from. You would use rules for each potential parent that can be inherited from:
p[data-specificity="1"]{
color:red;
font-family:verdana;
text-decoration:underline;
}
p[data-specificity="2"]{
color:black;
font-family:arial;
}
div.container > *[data-specificity="2"] {
font-family:impact;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
}
So these rules mean that any p tag which is a direct child of the div container and has specificity 2, is allowed to inherit properties from the div container. The blue color of the div gets inherited by the p with data-specificity 2.
Here's a JSFiddle where you can see this!
The idea is that like this, using HTML5, you can control exactly which elements are allowed to inherit which properties. It's a lot of extra code to write (for both child and parent elements) but you can use this to get rid of some unnecessary specificity
I've never actually seen anyone use this method in practice, I pretty much just cooked it up for you, but I think it could be very useful, what do you think ?
<div id="SideBar" class="sidebar mainbar">
I've just seen this in a .aspx file. Is this valid? Can someone point me in the right direction to learn what this does. I'm assuming its valid, but I'm not finding it in the css file. I am finding sidebar defined as a class, but not mainbar.
Thanks in advance,
Randy
This div just has two classes, which means it will get the properties defined under .sidebar as well as those under .mainbar
Sure, you can have an element implement as many css classes as you like. If there is no class defined in the CSS files it is possible that either:
The additional css classes have been removed from the styles sheets and the .aspx pages have not been refactored to match.
The css class is been used to identify the element(s) via javascript or some other scripting language.
As for mainbar not showing up in your CSS file, sometimes developers assign classes to elements and then reference those classes in javascript.
Yes this is perfectly valid. An element can be styled by multiple classes.
See this reference and this one which touches on which one takes precedence for duplicate style attributes.
CSS Tricks has a few other CSS tricks including having two classes.
Copy/Pasting the trick from the above site:
Usually attributes are assigned just one class, but this doesn't mean that that's all you're allowed. In reality, you can assign as many classes as you like!
Using these two classes together (separated by a space, not with a comma) means that the paragraph calls up the rules assigned to both text and side. If any rules overlap between the two classes then the class which is below the other in the CSS document will take precedence.
Beware of IE6 if someday you try to style an element using more than one class, it doesn't work like intended.
Googling "multiple classes ie6"
test case
No problem with id+class (like #anid.class ) or two selectors like .classA and then .classB but no .classA.classB
I didn't see anything on here about it with a quick search, if there is let me know.
Here is an example of a CSS selector I'd write.
div#container div#h h1 { /* styles */ }
div#container div#h ul#navi { /* styles */ }
div#container div#h ul#navi li.selected { /* styles */ }
I write all my CSS like. This allows me to stop from having styles floating around and I can technically re-use the same class name easily. For instance, I might use .selected on multiple elements across the site.
I also specify the element type (div, ul, etc) before the class/id unless the style is used for multiple elements. I also specify the element before id's even though there will only ever be one id because it allows me to know the element easily when reading my CSS. For instance I'll know right off the bat that em#example will most likely have a font-style of italic.
This isn't a question about CSS formating, it's about writing selectors.
I'd love to hear opinions on this approach, as I've used it for years and I'm reevaluating my stying.
Although it's somewhat off topic I also write my selectors like this for selector libraries (like jQuery for instance). Although I haven't looked into jQuery's internals to see if there is performance issue with specifying the element with an ID.
I think it really depends on what the selector is for.
Almost every site has one or a few style sheets that "skin" the site - fonts, text colour, link colour/hover, line spacing, and so on, and you don't want these selectors to be very specific. Similarly, if you have a component or element that's reused in many pages and always needs to look the same - like let's say the tags right here on SO - then it's going to be a pain to maintain if you use selectors based on the ID.
I would always use the ID in the selector if it refers to a specific element on a specific page. Nothing's more frustrating than trying to figure out why your rules don't seem to be working because of a conflict with some other rule, which can happen a lot if everything is classes. On the other hand, I think that nesting the IDs as you are (#container #h) is redundant, because the purpose of an ID is to be unique. If you have more than one element with the same ID on the same page then you can end up with all sorts of problems.
It does make the CSS slightly easier to understand when your selectors provide some idea of the "structure" that's being represented, but, to be honest, I think that goes against the idea of separation of concerns. The #navi might be moved outside the #h for perfectly legitimate reasons, and now somebody has to update the style sheet for #navi, even though nothing about it has changed.
A bit subjective as Darrell pointed out but that's my two cents.
While the question is a little subjective I have to say I agree with your thinking. I think defining the element before the selector is clearer when reading the code and it is less error prone.