I have a PHP script that has two CSS files in it's header. One of the CSS files only have about 5 short lines in it.
Is is safe to move that one into the larger CSS file? What's the point of having two separate CSS files when one is only a few lines?
Yes their is a point in it. I have for example a design.css that handles all of the colors, a layout.css pure for positioning and sizes and I have a interaction.css which handles the animations etc..
There is no problem in combining the CSS file as long as it doesnt affect readability.. Just keep in mind that the structure must remain:
file1.css
file2.css
results in on file containing the below code in the same order:
/* content of file1.css */
/* content of file2.css */
No point at all (in this case). You should move the few lines into another.
If you have 2 separate files - there will be 2 requests to the server.
You'll probably not see the difference as these are miliseconds, but it would be a "best practice" in this case.
In essence it helps browsers only load content relevant to the page, speeding up page load times.
There are services that can show how much of your downloaded CSS was applied to a given page.
There is no reason why you shouldnt move it into the same file.
You can have as few or as many CSS files as you need.
The advantage is only really when you have a huge number of styles and the CSS file gets large and unreadable. Then it makes sense to break them down. Or when you want to split them for different pages etc.
Its just an extra request to the server which seems pointless for only 5 lines.
Check to make sure that your PHP script does not reference the CSS file that has just a few lines in it. If it does not, then you're in the clear to merge the two. If it DOES reference it, then consider calling the shorter CSS file inside the larger CSS file like so:
#import url('/css/smaller-file.css');
If you add that to your larger CSS file, then you should be able to just have the larger CSS file in your PHP header.
Hope this helps!
Of course there is a point, just like there is a point in having many files of any languages to organize the content.
As having many requests is a big burden on performances, the usual solution (and mine) is to use a build script to build the version in production by concatenating all the CSS files of the directory into one. The precise way to do that depends on your building
Note that it's similar with what is done with JS files which are concatenated and minified.
Related
I very frequently use the CSS line numbers in Inspect Element to find where a rule is in a particular CSS file. When Sass outputs a CSS file, it imposes its own style rules on it which really don't line up 1:1 with how my SCSS is formatted. This makes it hard to find CSS rules in my code because none of the line numbers match. It's completely disturbing my workflow and is a major barrier to my further adoption of Sass.
I've already looked at sass --style=expanded and sass --style=compressed but neither of them come anywhere close to matching the whitespace style I want.
What I really need is a way to make Dart leave all my whitespace and line breaks exactly as they are, and minify mixins down to a single line each. Something you might call --style=preserve-line-numbers Is it possible?
No. That is not possible by SASS itself.
If you like you may have a look to the avaiable styles:
https://sass-lang.com/documentation/js-api#outputstyle
But to be honest: if you use SASS in the intended way with nested styles, mixins, using modules ... the compiled CSS will considerably differ from the SASS code anyway. That even applys to the line numbers. So your problem is a common challenge in the coding process.
As fast debugging is important SASS offers mapping technique:
If activated you are able to see the source code in the browser on the fly. That's really easy and should meet your demands. Maybe you like to have a look on it. Here is a good overview to it: https://thesassway.com/using-source-maps-with-sass-3-3/
Or however if not that way there is another little trick/workarround which may help:
Most SASS projects organize/structures code in partial files (which doesn't make it possible to keep line numbers). That's for different reasons and speeds up working as well. If you do so you just start every file with a CSS comment which notes the file name only. As comments are shown in the browser tools you are able to find the relevant SASS source file without mapping ... and as partial files are almost not as long finding the relevant code (which differs from the CSS) should not longer be the problem.
// ### examples partial filename in a CSS comment
/* base-typography */
...
/* base-forms */
...
/* section-hero */
...
That is not as fast as mapping technique I would really recommend. But finding the code that way is faster than try to keep line numbers exactly the same and missing that way a lot of other advantages of SASS which speeds up my work (like nestings, setting SASS only comments, using mixins and modules ...).
Using a large CSS file, does it also slow down DOM processing?
Or the loading speed of the page is only affected by the file size?
I imagine that the browser when first loading the css file does
some kind on indexing to be able to use the css rules.
The parsing of the file logically will take longer for a larger file.
But the processing of the dom elements will be affected or not?
Not Necessarily!
According to This link and This Link, there are many, many factors that can go into this Such as;
Don't use #import
Always use Backup Fonts
Segregate large CSS files out into multiple Smaller ones
Minify as much as possible
I hope this is useful to you :)
I know placing all your styles in a CSS file is the best thing to do as it is a lot neater.
But does it REALLY matter if the styles are inline or in a CSS?????
Edit below
My plan is to just place the styles in my MasterPage and all other pages will use the MasterPage....I believe the correct term is not "INLINE" but Embedded???
Some thoughts from one with experience, rather than a 'purist':
Storing all styles, for a large application, in one CSS file is not maintainable. You'll have perform a text search of the file to find the style you're looking for, or scroll a lot, and there's a higher chance that you'll overlook related styles when making an update.
If certain styles are particular to a page, not globally used, it is more maintainable to keep them in a style tag within the head tag.
Deep CSS inheritance hierarchies are also not maintainable. These are much, much worse than inline styles!
The CSS language itself does a poor job of applying styles to many elements in more complex structures. Consider lesscss, sass, or even jQuery for more than basic application of styles.
Lots of developers use HTML for presentation, mostly DIVs, when they think they are doing the right thing, or lecturing others. Some example above!
Using Inline CSS:
Repeat the same rule for every
element in the page.
More code and bigger file size to
transfer to the client.
Harder to maintain, suppose you want
to change the width to 200px, you
will need to go through all the page
and edit one by one.
inline:
<div style="width:100px; height:100px;"></div>
<div style="width:100px; height:100px;"></div>
external OR put css classes in the head [embedded styling]:
<div class="big"></div>
<div class="big"></div>
Based on your edit: that seems not to be inline CSS as in my example above, it is the same idea as using an external file, so if you want to do that go ahead, it is the same.
It matters because your code becomes very difficult to maintain or update if you use inline styles. Keeping your styles in style tags or separate CSS files allows you to comply with Don't Repeat Yourself, which is probably the most important development principle.
That being said, if you are absolutely certain that a piece of styling is unique to a given element, and also that it won't ever need to be tweaked, you can feel free to use inline styling. I sometimes use inline style for throwaway code and for things like landing pages (once they're done, they're done).
No but it is alot easier to make changes to the css if you only have to look one place instead of all your headers/inline
One other thing, your markup looks alot cleaner if you dont have eny css/javascript inline
When creating master pages I use in-line styles to create the basic layout of the page. For instance I include all of the styles that position the header at the top of the page, main content in the middle and footer at the bottom. Pretty much every style attribute related to positioning, I include in the masterpage as an inline style.
Storing styles in one document helps you to control on your entire project. Furthermore less code to maintain and applying changes.
It is a loth easier for maintenance... does it really matter depends on what you think what is important... why wouldn't you use a css file?
Do you mean putting your styles in the with or attaching them as 'style="x"' to your element?
There's several reasons for avoinding inline CSS.
1) Maintenance, it's easier to make changes to a code where all css is seperated from the markup itself. It also makes the code more readable as avoiding alot of inline css gives you less code.
<div class='test'></div>
is easier on the eye than:
<div style='background:yellow;width:10000px;height:10px;position:absolute;top:10003px;left:132032px;'></div>
When the css is inline you will also have a hard time finding where the code itself is and comparing styles. You will also often end up repeating the same code several times because you can't use classes.
2) Performance, CSS files can be gzipped, making for a smaller load. It's also easier for the browser to handle when it get js and css served as files.
3) Keeping with the best practice. Some other poor developer might want to edit your code later, and he sure would be happy if you kept away from inline CSS.
Now of course you can do CSS in the head of a document too, but why make your files bigger than they need to be? More code into the same file makes for more mess. And you can't gzip it if you do.
#Etienne , there is one disadvantage doing this way , if you want to deploy any changes to production you have make a build and push it.
If you maintain everything as css , you can just push the css file changes and invalidate the load balancer cache.
I thought this is a good point to mention.
When it is best to use inline style
Inline style is the best solution in situations when some style is created dynamically from user input via server-side code (ex, WordPress plugin), to be applied only to a single HTML element, in such cases insert it into an external CSS file causes only problems:
There is the need for a server-side code that creates a CSS class
with the dynamic style inside it.
There is the need for a server-side
code that write and save the .css file
There is the need for a
server-side code that is able to link the CSS classes created to the
correct HTML elements You must load an external CSS file for no
reason, this is a downgrade of performance (file size and 1 more HTTP
request)
In many cases, where the dynamic codes are just one or two,
the problems are startling clears: you must create a file of ex.
800bytes with 2 lines of code, and load it as external files.
Greater exposure to bugs. More a code is complex more are chances of bugs. The server-side codes above are very complex in comparison to the simplicity of the task they do.
Real use-case:
Imagine a scenario where a user wants to upload an image and use it as a background in an HTML element. With old rule is just style="background-image:URL()". with the new rule some code must create and save an external file, with just the code style="background-image:URL()", create a CSS class for it, write it in the HTML component, load this CSS file with just one line of code. Totally nonsense. Consider also that this operation must be done every time the user updates the image.
Final result:
Worst performance due to 1 more HTTP request and large, complex, server-side codes.
Wasting hours of time for authors to develop something that is not only useless but also creates real problems.
At least one more file in the project
Worst readability/comprehensibility of the code because a user must check the HTML and then find the CSS code of the linked CSS class to see the value of the style.
When it is best to use an external CSS file
In all other cases than the ones explained above, in short, when the style is fixed and never change you should put it in an external CSS file.
Can someone explain what are the benefits of using the #import syntax comparing to just including css using the standard link method?
As the answerer said, it lets you split your CSS into multiple files whilst only linking to one in the browser.
That said, it's still wasteful to have multiple CSS files downloading on high-traffic websites. Our build script actually "compiles" our CSS when building in release mode by doing the following:
All CSS files are minified (extra whitespace and comments removed)
We have a "core.css" file that's just a list of #import statements; during compilation, each of these is replaced by the minified CSS of that file
Thus we end up with a single, minified CSS file in production, whilst in development mode we have the separate files to make debugging easier.
If you use <link>s in your HTML files, all those files have to keep track of all the CSS files. This obviously makes changes and additions (both for CSS and HTML files) harder.
Using #import, you reduce a theoretically infinite number of changes down to one.
#import allows you have an extensible styesheet without having to change the html. You can link once to your main sheet and then if you want to add or remove additional sheets your html doesn't change.
Also, more smaller files help the browser do better caching. If you make a change in one part of a large sheet, the entire sheet must be downloaded again for every user. If the styles are separated into logical areas among a few sheets, only the file containing the part that changed needs to be downloaded. Of course, this comes at the cost of additional http requests.
One other handy bit, although pretty outdated, is that Netscape 4 couldn't handle #import, so it is a good way of serving a stylesheet to NS4, then having another stylesheet for more modern browsers that was imported in a standards compliant way.
#import is CSS code. <link> is HTML code. So, if you want to include stylesheets in other stylesheets (or if you can’t change HTML), #import is the way to go.
According to the CSS spec, all #import declarations must appear before any style rules in your stylesheet. In other words, all at the top of your stylesheet
Any #import declarations that appear after style rules should be ignored. Internet Explorer has never respected this; I believe other browsers do. This makes #import a bit less useful, because rules in a stylesheet that’s imported will be overriden by rules of equal specificity in the importing stylesheet.
It allows you to keep your logic CSS file spread over multiple physical files. Helps in team development, for example. Also useful when you have a lot of CSS files that you want to separate by functional areas (one for grids, one for lists, etc), let have accessible in the same logical file.
Say you work for Massive Dynamics, Corp.. It has a Widgets division. The Widgets division has an Accounts department. Accounts is divided into Accounts Payable and Accounts Receivable.
Using #include, you start the website with one top-level global.css stylesheet, which applies to everything.
Then you create a second stylesheet, widgets.css for the Widgets division. It #includes the global one, and its own styles (which can over-ride the global styles if needed, because of the Cascade). Then you create a third accounts.css for Accounts. It #includes widgets.css, which means it also includes global.css. Lather, rinse, repeat.
I'm building a new site for my company, and I'm at the stage where I've created the html mockup of the first page. I'm going to use this as a basis for the rest of the site. I'm thinking of organising my stylesheet better now I've got the design looking consistent cross-browser, but I'm wondering how far to go when I'm breaking it up.
One idea is to have the following:
reset.css
typography.css
layout.css
colors.css
but where do I draw the line? theoretically I could go on and break them down into classes, ids etc, but I think thats going overboard.
Does this seem a reasonable method?
Coincidentally, A List Apart had an article covering this today. They recommend separating out into a few main categories, including some you listed (type, layout, color), but going further to include various tricks to keep older browsers happy.
On the other hand, keeping everything in one css file keeps the requests between browser & server down. A compromise might be to keep things separate for development, and merging for production (as a part of your build process, naturally :p).
I don't tend to split typography into a seperate stylesheet, although it seems like a good idea. I'd keep colours with typography though. My typical way is to have the following structure:
base.css
Global style used throughout the site
Aims to be extendable, for example so that it can be reskinned (but using the exisiting layout) for a microsite.
Implements/imports reset.css
page.css
Implements any page-specific changes.
microsite_skin.css
See base.css point 2
Pickledegg,
There's nothing wrong with breaking up style sheets. In fact, I find it very useful to organize css rules into different files based on their type, or what parts of the site they are applied to. If you lump rules into one large file, it can quickly become a mess and become very difficult to manage.
I would recommend coming up with your own scheme for separating your rules into files, and stick with it for all your projects.
I would break layout down into 2+ more parts, Base layout, IE Hacks, Menus (one for each menu area. This could be something like a top menu and a side menu)
If the site where to change color depending on the area I'd add one for each color area as well.
You also could use Yaml or similar as a base framework for your layout.
I'd keep the different stylesheets seperate while designing only merging them into 2-4 depending on the site shortly before uploading/releasing. always keeping the Hacks apart.
Separate them based on what you estimate your needs are going to be later on. If you think the typography, layout, or colours (globally) are going to change, then it's probably wise to at least delineate styles in that way so it's easier to replace one stylesheet with another later on.
But if you go too far in this you'll end up with duplicate rules everywhere (eg. #content having a font-family rule in typography.css, a color rule in colors.css, etc). That's not a logical way to split things up unless you anticipate the key changes to be taking place there.
If, on the other hand, like most sites the graphic design is going to remain fairly static but the architecture is going to have some changes made (eg a new content type) then you want to be grouping your styles based on the context of the site. For instance, article.css, search.css, etc.
Essentially, try to look ahead at what changes are going to be needed later on and then try to anticipate those changes in your css file setup.
The major problem IMO, is the duplicate property definition issue. This makes style-sheets unmanageable. To bypass this issue the divide and conquer approach is used. If we can ensure manageable style sheets with non-conflicting rules, then merging sheets or modularising them would be easy.
During reviews all I do is check for rule conflicts, classitis and divitis. Using Firebug/CSSTidy combination, the problem areas are highlighted. Thinking in these lines, I don't even look into typography and font-separation.
The goal is to have a singel base CSS file and separate browser hacks files. Multiple base CSS files would be needed if an application has different themes.
I put all styles, including IE6-and-7-specific styles, in one sheet. The IE6 and 7 styles are targeted using conditionally-commented divs that only appear if one of those browsers come to the site, e.g.:
<body>
<!--[if IE 7]><div class="IE IE7"><![endif]-->
<!--[if IE 6]><div class="IE IE6"><![endif]-->
... rest of markup ...
<!--[if IE]></div><![endif]-->
</body>
Not sure what people think of this approach, but the extra markup is negligible, and being able to include IE6/7 styles next to main styles without the use of hacks... just prepending the selector with ".IE" or ".IE6" etc, is a big convenience.
As for multiple stylesheets... save your HTTP requests. Use image sprites, one stylesheet, one "application.js" javascript, etc.
I'd still include separate sheets for the print and handheld styles, but that's about it...
Don't go too much further than that. If you do have to, try and find a way to merge them before production. The biggest issue is that you begin stacking up HTTP requests. It's not so much an issue for the browser but the amount of requests that need to be made for each page. I would say you are at a good point, more than 4 would be going somewhat overboard. Remember you can always use good commenting and formatting to break up large CSS files.
Whenever I'm trying to decide how far to break apart some files (I usually do this with code modules, but I apply the same principals to my css/js) I break it down to the smallest reusable files that make sense together. This isn't the best for the flow of data across the wire, but it makes maintainability of my source a lot easier. Especially if you're going to be having a lot of css floating around.
If you feel comfortable taking your colors.css and using the whole thing in another location without modification then you're probably fine.
Take a look at blueprint-css. Blueprint is a CSS framework which supplies a variety of default styles to you (such as browser reset code).
The style sheets in blueprint-css are organized as follows:
screen.css - default styles for screens
print.css - default styles for printing
ie.css - Internet Explorer specific fixes
application.css - contains the styles you write. Actually you shouldn't modify the previous three style sheets at all, because these are generated by blueprint-css. You can overwrite all blueprint-css styles in your application.css file.
For further details refer to the blueprint-css Git repository.
I break mine up almost exactly the same way:
reset.ccs - The standard reset from MeyerWeb
typography.css - Fonts, sizes, line-heights, etc
layout.css - All positioning, floats, alignments, etc.
colors.css (or more appropriately skin.css) - All colors, background images, etc.
These are then followed with IE-specific files included via conditional comments for the appropriate version.
I haven't had the need to separate them further, though I do organize each file in separate sections (base elements, named elements, classes, etc.)
UPDATE: I have changed my system a bit in the last few projects I have done.
base.css - Contains the CSS from the YUI reset and YUI base CSS files (with attribution)
main.css - Contains #import statements for the following:
typography.css - Fonts, sizes, line-heights, etc
layout.css - All positioning, floats, alignments, etc.
theme.css - All colors, background images, etc.
print.css - Overrides for the other CSS files to make the pages print-friendly.
I also then use conditional comments to add any IE-specific CSS files if needed.
My next step in improving this would be to add a build-process step to combine all of the CSS files into one file to reduce the HTTP requests on the server.
Everybody recommends to break. I'll be the devil's advocate.
How about NOT breaking style sheets. At least for production purposes is better to have a single request instead of many. The browser can process 2 simultaneous HTTP requests. This means that other 2 requests can be made after the first 2 are completed.
Combined files are a way to reduce the number of HTTP requests by combining all scripts into a single script, and similarly combining all CSS into a single stylesheet. Combining files is more challenging when the scripts and stylesheets vary from page to page, but making this part of your release process improves response times.
Yahoo and Google recommend this.
Google is recommending creating 2 files. One for everything necessary at the startup and 1 for everything else.
I think that even designers have to think in optimizing terms, not only hardcore developers.