I havent done CSS in awhile (~5-7yrs).
So i need a little assistance in a possible solution to my quandry.
Ideal design:
table.ctable
{ class:collapsible collapsed; }
Now i know that its syntactically not correct but was wondering if there was a way to create some base-class CSS and then have those class(es) derive into a parent. I know its not OOP, but figured there would be a way around the current structure to accomidate this type of inclusion.
You couls use a SASS mixin:
#mixin left($dist) {
float: left;
margin-left: $dist;
}
#data {
#include left(10px);
}
or a LessCSS mixin:
.left(#dist) {
float: left;
margin-left: #dist;
}
#data {
.left(10px);
}
No, unfortunately you can't inherit rules from another class. The closest you can get is JavaScript getting elements by class name and applying extra classes to them, but then you have the jump between the page loading the JS running.
Related
It sounds like this is something that sass/less/mixins/jquery are required for right now.
What I'm looking to do is something like this:
.myClass {
color: blue;
}
h1 {
class: myClass;
}
I'm curious why this was not done already, given that CSS seems to be about inheritance/aggregation if nothing else.
Does it not make sense for some reason?
Or maybe it's just too complex?
Thanks!
...I don't know if this is the first '#extend' proposal, but it comes out because of its popularity in sass, apparently: http://tabatkins.github.io/specs/css-extend-rule/
and there is an early discussion of the proposal in this list thread: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-houdini/2015Jan/0005.html
Not sure if it is going to be a future CSS standard. But you can already do it with SASS and SCSS. Here is SCSS syntax:
.myClass {
color: blue;
}
h1 {
#extend .myClass;
...
}
Documentation: https://sass-lang.com/documentation/at-rules/extend
Well, in effect what you are trying to do is to make your CSS properties defined in the .myClass block, apply in your h1 block, (correct me if I'm wrong).
If that's what you meant, you can already do that by simply adding myClass to your h1 tag like <h1 class="myClass">Header</h1> and in your CSS you would do this:
.myClass {
color: blue;
}
// or
h1.myClass {
color: blue; // To only target h1 that have the 'myClass' class
}
Will future CSS standard allow applying classes to elements in a style declaration?
Well as you can see we can already do that with HTML, so I doubt it.
I've been looking for the answers, but either it's not what I am really looking for, or I am not searching up properly. I want to dynamically generate the class name. Since, I use margin-top quite frequently, I have multiple classes defined with a set of rules, and I want to achieve with LESS.
I don't think is possible to create dynamic generated classes, as far as I did my research. Here is my code:
.margin-top-(#value)px {
margin-top: #value;
}
Desired Output
.margin-top-20px {
margin-top: 20px;
}
.margin-top-100px {
margin-top: 100px;
}
Just an example of what I am expecting.
Try to use mixin to achieve this.
//define the mixin
.margin-top(#value) {
.margin-top-#{value}{
margin-top:#value;
}
}
//use the mixin like this
.margin-top(20px);
U can try it here: http://winless.org/online-less-compiler
I know that sass provides us with #extend method that allows me to do this:
%knob {
width: 10px;
height: 10px;
}
.house {
&__door {
&__knob {
color: inherit;
#extend %knob;
&--red {
#extend %knob;
// $1
color: red;
}
&--blue{
#extend %knob;
// $1
color: blue;
}
}
}
}
however i would prefer not to define abstract class %knob at all, would it be possible to reference/include properties defined in __knob (width and height in this case) from within its modifiers --red and --blue?
im including sassmeister snippet here to help out a bit: http://sassmeister.com/gist/58b5b4673a18ecadbba7
example here might not look like an issue but if an element with a long class name has 2 or more different groups of modifiers, and I wont create an abstract class, i sometimes end up with html tags looking like this <p class="some other classes some-house__some-door__some-knob some-house__some-door__some-knob--red">example</p> which I find not very desirable.
what i would like to achieve:
referencing parent element would alow me to reduce this string to <p class="some other classes some-house__some-door__some-knob--red"></p> without necessity of declaring an abstract %knob class
why am I hesitant about using an abstract class here:
declaring an abstract class inside __door element (http://sassmeister.com/gist/bc49e0885342e96a8fbd) gives me this result:
.house__door .house__door__knob, .house__door .house__door__knob--red, .house__door .house__door__knob--blue {
width: 10px;
height: 10px;
}
instead of desired
.house__door__knob, .house__door__knob--red, .house__door__knob--blue {
width: 10px;
height: 10px;
}
and declaring an abstract class outside of the scope its going to be used in makes the code less readable
or maybe theres a different apporach i could use in order to make my code more readable/maintainable?
while searching for an answer to my question i came to the conclusion that inheriting parent element properties/ using #extend or #include here might not be the best idea as it would work well only if an element had 1 modification at most:
in other cases if multiple modifications extended same model, and were to be used to the same html element, all of the base properties would be declared multiple times
also there is no need at all to deeply nest elements (i.e. foo__bar__baz). separating elements makes code easier to maintain.
I'm looking into LESS because I definitely see some of their benefits. For instance colour declaration.
One thing I don't understand tho, and maybe I'm not getting the flow right is - why use the following LESS snippet
.radius {
-webkit-border-radius:5px;
-moz-border-radius:5px;
border-radius:5px;
}
.btn-red{
background-color:red;
.radius;
}
.btn-green{
background-color:green;
.radius;
}
...
When we can use the .radius class in the html file right away. I'm left with the impression that LESS will add a ton of duplicate code once it gets compiled.
I'm using the following, which makes more sense. Same with font-size, margins, etc... Aren't classes used in such cases?
<div class="btn-red radius">Cancel</div>
<div class="btn-green radius">Go</div>
The snippet above does not benefit from SASS/LESS capabilities that much. Lets have a closer look and check this SCSS snippet.
// Abstract placeholder.
%radius {
border-radius: 5px;
}
// Put your global styling here.
// I'm assuming that you can alter the markup and have button.btn.btn-green
.btn {
// Color modifier.
&-red {
#extend %radius;
background-color: red;
}
&-green {
#extend %radius;
background-color: green;
}
}
The CSS output will be:
.btn-red, .btn-green {
border-radius: 5px;
}
.btn-red {
background-color: red;
}
.btn-green {
background-color: green;
}
And then you have to pick up Autoprefixer and vendor-prefixes issue is solved once and for all.
Because now, you can just specify the class btn_red or btn_green and all the buttons will automatically have a radius.
Your HTML should contain only the semantics, and styling or classes referring to styling should not be part of it.
That applies to the other classes as well. If for instance, you would rename btn_red to btn_cancel, you have a meaningful classname that you can apply to any kind of cancel button. And in the CSS you can specify that a cancel button is red and a 'Go' button is green, and both have a radius, without needing to modify the HTML at all.
So, the ultimate goal is to have the HTML describe the structure and the CSS describe how that structure should look. And a CSS preprocessor is only their to make a bulky spaghetti-like CSS file more structured.
There are several benefits.
You can use more semantic class names. Rather than encoding style information directly in your class names, (btn-red, radius) you could use a single class that conveys the usage of the style, rather than its contents.
You can avoid repeating yourself.
#radius-size: 5px;
-webkit-border-radius:#radius-size;
-moz-border-radius:#radius-size;
border-radius:#radius-size;
You can parameterize it so that you'd be able to use different radiuses (radii?) in different contexts.
.radius(#radius-size) { ... }
Because there are cases that developer has-no-access or don't-want to change the markup. and the only solution is to include all props from a predefined class.
for example:
you have bootstrap loaded (then you already have .has-success and .has-error classes) and if you want to use HTML5's native form validation using input's :valid and :invalid states, you have to use JavaScript to add/remove success/error classes based on input's states. but with this feature of LESS you can include all props of success/error class inside input's states. the code for this example could be something like this:
#myinput {
&:valid { .has-success; }
&:invalid { .has-error; }
}
Is it possible to add additional rules to a css block when using a "{ (properties of x) }" selector?
I looked at references but I can't find anything related to "properties of x". A link would be wonderful. I tried the following two combinations, but neither worked:
.dock li { (properties of grid_2; display:inline; background-color:#666; ) }
.dock li { display:inline; background-color:#666; (properties of grid_2) }
Many thanks!
EDIT
Apparently I misread an article and thought that such a syntax existed. I thought one could create a class and let it inherit the properties of another using such syntax, which is evidently not the case.
CSS does not have such a feature.
What you are describing is not possible. I think there are two other possibilities you could maybe use. The first is, that you need to know that several styles can be applied to an element at the same time. I'll give you an example:
li { font-size: 10pt; }
.dock li { color: #ff0000; }
All list items will be formatted with a font size of 10 points and only those within an element containing the dock class will be red.
My second suggestion is that you try applying two or more classes to your HTML element, for instance:
.grid li { font-size: 10pt; }
.dock li { color: #ff0000; }
Now put the grid and dock class into your HTML, and the elements will apply both style definitions:
<ul class="grid dock"> ...
Whatever you consider best for your project: remember that the properties defined in the second style overwrite the properties of the first one (if they do not define the same properties at all, there will be no confusion).
maybe your question is not too strange..
What I understand is that you want to do something like:
.a { prop1: val; prop2: val; }
.b { prop3: val; prop4: val; }
.c { .a; .b; prop5: val; prop6: val; }
You want the class .c to inherit all the properties and values of .a and .b
If this is ok, you can do that using LESS.
To use your LESS code in your sites you have different ways to do it.
First of all check the original site: LESS.org
If you are on Mac check this site: LESS APP + PLUGINS
If you are on PC the less.js plugin should be easier to implement LESS in your sites: less.js usage
Hope it helps.
Happy coding y'all! :)