I know I can just have a custom stylesheet that overrides the bootstrap component I wish to customize (for example the jumbotron), but is the right way to go about this "problem"? I don't think this can be done with a bootstrap theme, although I haven't read a whole lot on this subject.
You can use your browsers DevTools to inspect an element that you want to change, and in the Rules/Styles section you can see which CSS elements is it using and then you can create your own css file and paste the CSS there and change it so it overrides bootstraps element. Here is how to get the devtools from Chrome https://developer.chrome.com/devtools#dom-and-styles and from Firefox https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Page_Inspector/How_to/Open_the_Inspector. Don't forget to import your CSS customised script under bootstraps so it overrides the CSS that you wish to change.
Use twitter-bootstrap customize on their website to customize it and download the customized files. Or just create a custom CSS file and edit classes like .jumbotron and other stuff
There are a few ways to modify the default bootstrap css and no one way is inherently more or less "right" than any other. It all depends on the coding style of you and/or your team. Here is a list of a few ways that I came up with off the top of my head:
Modify the css file you downloaded from Bootstrap
(My Choice) Override Bootstrap styles with your own CSS. Just be sure to follow the rules of CSS Specificity (External < Internal < Inline) and if you have trouble getting a certain rule to apply try reading this answer or force it with !important
NOTE: This is likely NOT a comprehensive list, just a starting point.
So I know you can extend Foundation classes once you have the Foundation scss/css included and I know you can include the classes to the dom (OOCSS style) but here's my use-case:
I have style sheet, menus.scss. This is compiled into app.css along with Foundation.scss.
I can use the #extend here because I'm including Foundation before it.
#menu {
#extend .top-bar;
}
THE PROBLEM
Now, say I want to compile a separate sheet (because maybe it's only included on some pages)
Now if I #import Foundation into this stylesheet I will end up with the framework included twice (which is crazy of course.)
So... maybe a solution would be to have a version of the Framework that works on silent classes EG: %top-bar so I can include Foundation everywhere without fear of duplicating lots of code. I know there are some base components that will need to be included globally so that the sub-classes will work but how else can I do it?
To my knowledge silent frameworks don't exist so I'm looking for alternatives..
Ideas?
It will be perfect if you can isolate css critical to the initial page layout like grid, type, visibility components and inline them in to the page head or, if you have a ton of pages, in css file with the final size under 1-1.5k(really hard to do).
Then you can just defer auxiliary css and their size wont matter much.
Or You can use some css cleaner tool to remove selector duplicates or just make your own, it's pretty simple since the entire blocks of css will match.
I saved and am using the bootstrap css but it conflicts with my main css.
it has tags body, html, a, img, p... and my css loses configuration
how can I use the bootstrap css without colliding?
thank you
Try importing your custom CSS after Bootstrap CSS.
In CSS, the “!important” suffix was originally intended to provide a method of overriding author stylesheets. Users could define their own “user stylesheets” and could use this suffix to give their rules precedence over the author’s (website creator’s) styles.
Unfortunately, and quite predictably, its usage has spread massively, but not in the right direction. Nowadays, it’s used to counteract the pain of having to deal with CSS specificity, otherwise known as the set of rules which dictate that “div h1 a” is more specific selector than “div a”. Most people that use CSS on a daily basis don’t know enough about CSS specificity to solve their problems without using the “!important” suffix.
1.over ride those styles in your css file by using !important property. bootsrtap css either override or extend your css with bootstrap css so if you want to override entire css of some class best to use !important property.
2.if your are using script in your code so its very easy to differentiate the css styles.
Try combining into one CSS, multiple CSS slows down the sites.
Even, Bootstrap has its own body,html, etc tags. You have to edit them or delete/comment them. So it avoids conflicts.
Generally, the last CSS property will be applied, so if you put your body, html etc at the end of Bootstrap.css, that might work, but not recommended.
I have a simple HTML page that is referencing 3 CSS files. The first is a style sheet that is just for the page. The other two are for the styles of two unique modals. These modal CSS files were not created by me and they are happily being used separately on other pages throughout the site.
My problem is that both of these modal CSS files contain a few common selectors and so they are messing up each other's styles.
I understand that the best way to fix this problem is to take one or both of the files and make their selectors unique. One way would be to namespace the selectors.
My questions is, however, now that I'm knee-deep in this page, is there anyway to prevent these CSS conflicts without changing the modal CSS pages as they currently stand? Are there any tools that can help such as LESS? What is the best practice for preventing this in the future?
The best solution indeed would be to refactor those css-files to your need.
However, an easier solution would be to include your stylesheet after those two third-party css-files and re-declare the styles for the common selectors, which automatically overrides the previous settings.
LESS/SASS are excellent tools to help you write CSS faster and more comfortable. I use SASS for private work and really recommend it. They can't help you though with issues like you have atm.
EDIT:
Using !important is possible, but considered bad habit, as it was intended to give the user the possibility to override author-styles with his own. Instead of using !important what you should do is:
Avoid duplicate styles as much as you can.
if you can't avoid this, try to resolve this by either:
cascading (=using the proper sequence to override previous styles)
using selector specificity (W3C-Spec).
Assuming:
...
<link rel="stylesheet" href="this_page.css" />
<link rel="stylesheet" href="modal_1.css" />
<link rel="stylesheet" href="modal_2.css" />
...
Due to the cascading nature of CSS (sorry, I had to) using the same selector over and over overrides any previous styles. Thus, if modal_1.css and modal_2.css both apply style x to the body tag, for example, the second stylesheet will override the first.
The sad part is that there is no way out other than to, as you suggested, modify the two selectors to make them more specific.
Looking to the future, the best way to avoid overriding previously declared styles, is to always be specific about the particular element you are targeting, and it's proper place in the DOM. Note that LESS is simply a CSS preprocessor, which only allows you a different syntax for CSS.
I would suggest to a common class add into body tag of that particular page & target using that particular class. If you tools like LESS or Compass you can easily achieve the aim.
.pageOne{ /*All the styles for this perticular page*/
.header{
}
.sidebar{
}
}
When parse through LESS or Compass it will look like following.
.pageOne .header{}
.pageOne .sidebar{}
This way your page will get a namespace.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
We have a large ASP.Net website that has a single css stylesheet which is getting out of control.
I am thinking of using the following strategy (taken from http://www.techrepublic.com/article/developing-a-css-strategy/5437796/) which seems logical to me...
you might have one CSS file devoted to sitewide styles and separate CSS files for identifiable subsets of site pages (such as pages for a specific department or pages with a different layout style). For styles that are unique to a specific page, use a separate CSS file for each page (if there are too many styles to fit comfortably in the document header). You link or import the appropriate CSS files for each page, so that you load all the styles needed to display that page, but very few unnecessary styles that only appear on other pages.
Is this a good way to proceed? What are the alternatives?
I think the best option is to divide css in:
-layout.css
-content.css
Then if you need other more specific you can add more like an css for the ads: ads.css, or one css for a specific section.
I would also add ie.css for IE css hacks.
I would not speak about creating one css for only one page: the problem you can have if you use too many css, is that your page will have to do more requests to the server and this will slow your page.
This is why i recommend you to implement an HttpHandler which will create a cache copy in only one file of the css you need at the moment. Look here:
http://blog.madskristensen.dk/post/Combine-multiple-stylesheets-at-runtime.aspx
There are three principle methods used for breaking up stylesheets: property-based, structure-based, and hybrid. Which method you choose should most be based on workflow and personal preference.
Property-Based
The most basic, representative form of a property-based breakup would be to use two stylesheets: structure.css and style.css. The structure.css file would contain rules that only used properties like height, width, margin, padding, float, position, etc. This would effectively contain the "building blocks" necessary to arrange the elements of the page the way you want. The style.css file would contain rules with properties like background, font, color, text-decoration, etc. This effectively acts as a skin for the structure created in the other stylesheet.
Additional separation might include using a typography.css file, where you'd place all of your font properties. Or a colors.css file, where you'd place all of your color and background properties. Try not to go overboard because this method quickly becomes more trouble than it's worth.
Structure-Based
The structure-based method of breaking up stylesheets revolves around segregating rules based on what elements to which they apply. For example, you might see a masthead.css file for everything in the header, a body.css file for everything in the content area of the page, a sidebar.css file for everything in the sidebar, and a footer.css file for everything at the bottom of the page.
This method really helps when you have a site with lots of distinct sections on each page. It also helps minimize the number of rules found in each stylesheet. Unlike the property-based method, which tends to have a rule in each stylesheet for each element on the page, with this method you only have one rule in one stylesheet for any given element.
Hybrid
As you might expect, the hybrid method combines the best of both methods and it's my preferred choice. Here you create a structure.css file, just like in the property-based method, using only those properties that you need to create the basic layout. Then you create additional stylesheets like masthead.css, which skins the header; body.css, which skins the content; etc.
Other Considerations
One problem that plagues each of these methods is that by creating multiple stylesheets, you require that the client's browser fetches many files. This can have a negative effect on the user experience because most browsers will only make two concurrent requests to the same server. If you have seven stylesheets, that means adding potentially hundreds of milliseconds on the initial page load (this effect is lessened once the stylesheets have been cached, but you want to make a good first impression on those new visitors). It's for this reason that the CSS sprites technique was created. Breaking up your stylesheets may wipe out any gains made by using sprites.
The way around this is to compress your broken-up stylesheets back into one stylesheet when the user makes a page request.
To get the best of both worlds, consider using a CSS meta-language like Sass. This allows a CSS author to break one stylesheet into many while still only presenting one stylesheet to the browser. This adds a step to the CSS authoring workflow (though it could potentially be scripted to compile the Sass into CSS any time a Sass file is updated), but it can be worthwhile, especially when considering some of Sass' many other benefits.
What you can do is have lots of easy to manage, separate files for development, then smoosh them all together into one file and minify it on your live site.
This is a little more work to set up, but gives you the best of both worlds - easy to manage site + fast page loads.
Edit: Yahoo's YUI compressor seems to be the best minifier around. It can compress both CSS and Javascript.
My solution, amidst plenty:
base.css / reset.css: your foundation {base layout, type, color} -- 100% reusability
helper.css: basic layout rules for modules as well as 'utility classes' {grid variations, forms, tables, etc} -- 90+% reusability
module.css: complex layout rules for modules {semantic modules like .post or .comment} - 75% reusability
layout.css: template-based rules {#hd, #bd, #ft, #homePage, etc.}- almost no reusability
color.css: all color rules, combined - 50% reusability
type.css: all type rules, combined - 75% reusability (text styling has less variations)
this separation also allows mobile and print versions for the layout sheets, all controlled by #import via the stylesheet I link to the html.
I am using this for a medium-sized site. For extra organization, I keep each sheet sectioned basically the same {wrapper, general, unique, etc}. I also tag my selectors and properties, as well as indent them in order of dependency inside the same selector group, so I know what rules I am referencing or extending. This framework allows nearly infinite expansion while keeping things organized, understandable, and reusable. I've had to refactor a 7000+ line master.css file a month ago, so this is a new system I am trying out. I've found that 100% content-semantic CSS isn't as scalable and easy to understand as a semantic/layout hybrid, since that's what CSS is used for anyway.
1.25-yr-later-edit: Another method which might be more relevant is to just use a good CSS text editor. I'm positive VS is crap for working with CSS, unless you happen upon some extensions. If you're on windows, give E Text Editor a shot, b/c it's a TextMate Windows port and has bundles designed for CSS and markup that give you much better syntax highlighting and autocompletion. What you then can do is organize, even a 8000-line stylesheet, into collapsible folds:
/** Start Module 1 */
[css]
/* End Module 1 **/
And use the symbol list to display for you a quick TOC on the fly with a query like Start or Module 1 It also indexes lines with /** these types of comments **/ (great for tagging areas) and all CSS selector chains. You should have no trouble working with single big files with E. Besides, unless you're progressively enhancing your CSS it's all going to get minified anyway. I would also make sure to indent your CSS to somewhat mimic the structure of DOM section it is referring to.
.container {}
.container .inner {}
.container .head {}
.container .inner.alt {}
Otherwise, I agree with the '1 Base CSS and 1 Page/Section CSS` method, though it entirely depends on your business requirements.
I would check out YUI CSS. Maybe not the answer you were looking for, but YUI CSS removes much of the hassle with different browsers etc...
Work out some simple rules that work for you (or your company).
Divide your CSS into separate files, such as:
layout.css
content.css
menu.css
typography.css
Decide what declarations will go in each file, for example, ensure:
font-weight, text-decoration, font-family
and
h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, a, p, li
All reside in the typography CSS file. Decide what to do for edge cases, such as border properties on headers, padding and margins on text elemants (layout or typography).
If your sets of declarations are getting unwieldy, some people like to organise them alphabetically.
Indent your css, for example:
#logo h1 {text-indent: -9999px}
#logo h1 a {display: block; width: 200px; height: 98px; backround...}
Comment your CSS, including references to other files if other rule for that specific selector reside there.
If you do divide you CSS into separate files, consider consolidating and compressing them into one file as part of your build & deployment process.
Make sure every developer is well aware of your standard for CSS.
Also, somewhat relevant, I've just been made aware of a Firefox plugin for finding unnecessary selectors. It's called Dust-Me Selectors.
netadictos makes some good points and I would concur. It's easy to seek reasons for more Css but the benefits of keeping them lean are far greater in the longer term.
In addition, have you looked at using themes and skin files within asp.net? The combination of .css and .skin can dramatically reduce the overall size of your Css, which is marginally good for performance but very good for easier administration.
Some exceptions could be contained within the one css file but if things are radically different within the one then you may consider a separate css or even a separate site if they are that different. Obviously you might load different versions of the themes depending on which user it is. This is where you could have an explosion of Css files. That is, say you had a css for each page and then you wanted to have different for different clients on your site, then you'd be growing exponentially. This of course assumes you have this challenge.
I wonder the same thing with regards to JavaScript files. If your site is highly dependent on Ajax to the point where almost every page requires some kind of custom Javascript then were do you stick it all?
Best practices oftern spout not having javascript in the page but as external files (as with css). But if you have a .js file per page then things will slowly get out of hand.
I'm not sure about Windows equivalents, but on the Mac you can get CSSEdit, which allows you to add folders to CSS files and manage them like that. There's a good explanation of it in this article.
Global css files have caused me headaches before. CSS usually isn't namespaced, so if two different modules create a div with a class of "box", then the intent of one overwrites the other. Also, styles on the [a] tag, [p] tag and other basic tags (ie. styles not based on classes or id's) will wreck havoc on 3rd party controls as your global style sheet cascades onto an html component that was designed assuming no other css on the page. Inappropriate usage of text centering to center elements can lead to hard to debug global centering. So I favor multiple css files. I've seen css managers (http modules that merge css together at request time), but decided the extra http requests is well worth limiting the scope of the damage ill considered css can do to my application.
We use Ruby on Rails so we have a clear controller/action pair, we use this to reference both CSS classes and Javascript views.
Specifically, grab the name of the controller+action name and embed this as a ID in the view, put it on the body tag or your main content div.
<body id="users_list_body">
Where "users" is the name of the controller, "list" is the action. Then in your CSS you have rules likes
#users_list_body
So you can scope all of your specific CSS to that view. Of course, you also have more general CSS to handle overall styling. But having this ID defined more easily allows you to create specific CSS for individual pages (since a controller/action maps to a specific page).
You end up having rules like this
#users_list_body table
#users_list_body table thead
Do the same for Javascript. So in the footer of every page you take your same controller/action name pair and embed it in a function call
//javascript
if(V.views.users_list) { V.views.user_list(); }
Then in your external Javascript you have something like
V = {};
V.views = {};
V.views.user_list = function() {
//any code you want to run for the Users controller / List action..
//jQuery or something
$('#save_button').click({ ... });
}
with all of your Javascript code scoped to a specific function, it ends up being all encapsulated. You can then combine all of your Javascript files into one, compress it and then serve it up as one file and none of your logic will conflict. One page's JS will not conflict with any other page's JS because each page is scoped by its method name.
Whatever your choice is, avoid using the #import directive.
Makes the browser load stylesheets sequentially, hence slowing down loading and rendering for your page.
Here is what I do: I keep my stylesheets separate, somewhat along the lines of what others have suggested. However, I have a script that concatenates them together, minifies them, adds the headers, and then gzips them. The resulting file is then used as the stylesheet and if it goes beyond the expiration date, it automatically recompiles. I do this on a sitewide basis for all the common files and then also on a page specific basis for CSS that will only appear on that page. At the most, I will only ever have 2 CSS files called per page and they will be compressed, which minimizes download time and size and the number of page requests, but I will still have the benefit of separating them in whatever way makes sense to me. The same strategy can also be used for JavaScript.