Optimize CSS: Narrow Definition (#mytable tbody span.myclass) better? - css

I wondered whether or not a 'narrow' definition such as
#mytable tbody span.myclass
{
color: #ffffff;
}
is better/faster to parse than just
.myclass
{
color: #ffffff;
}
I read somewhere that narrow definitions supposedly actually have some kind of adversery effect on CSS speed, but I can't remember where and it's been a while already so I just wanted to clarify if it matters or not, and if it does, which solution is better/faster.
Thank you!

Google's Page Speed has some information regarding using efficient CSS selectors. I suggest starting there.
So (very) basically, they recommend to:
Avoid using descendant selectors, especially those that specify redundant ancestors
So your second option is the fastest.

I would opt for the former snippet and not worry about any efficiency whatsoever; unless you have a dozen or so stylesheets CSS won't be a bottleneck. The former snippet is more readable and you know exactly what you're styling, and where it belongs structurally, so when you jump back to make edits you know what to search for.
Then again if you're making global styles like a class to contain floats it would be better to keep it simple.

"Speed optimization" really shouldn't be of any concern with CSS. The difference in any modern browser is marginal, but the difference in usage is not. You should decide when to use "narrow" or "broad" selectors based on what you want to achieve, how far you want styles to cascade, where you want them to be applicable and if you need to override a broader selector.

Related

In CSS, are !important declarations more or less efficient than non !important ones? [duplicate]

I hate them, it defies the cascading nature of CSS, and if you don't use them with care you end up in a loop of adding more !important.
But I want to know are they bad for performance?
EDIT
From the (fast) replies I can conclude it won't have a (significant) impact on performance.
But it's nice to know, even if it's just as an extra argument for discouraging others ;).
EDIT 2
BoltClock pointed out that if there are 2 !important declarations the specs says it will pick the most specific one.
It shouldn't have any discernible effects on performance. Seeing Firefox's CSS parser at /source/layout/style/nsCSSDataBlock.cpp#572 and I think that is the relevant routine, handling overwriting of CSS rules.
It just seems to be a simple check for "important".
if (aIsImportant) {
if (!HasImportantBit(aPropID))
changed = PR_TRUE;
SetImportantBit(aPropID);
} else {
// ...
}
Also, comments at source/layout/style/nsCSSDataBlock.h#219
/**
* Transfer the state for |aPropID| (which may be a shorthand)
* from |aFromBlock| to this block. The property being transferred
* is !important if |aIsImportant| is true, and should replace an
* existing !important property regardless of its own importance
* if |aOverrideImportant| is true.
*
* ...
*/
Firefox uses a top down parser written manually. In both cases each
CSS file is parsed into a StyleSheet object, each object contains CSS
rules.
Firefox then creates style context trees which contain the end values
(after applying all rules in the right order)
From: http://taligarsiel.com/Projects/howbrowserswork1.htm#CSS_parsing
Now, you can easily see, in such as case with the Object Model described above, the parser can mark the rules affected by the !important easily, without much of a subsequent cost. Performance degradation is not a good argument against !important.
However, maintainability does take a hit (as other answers mentioned), which might be your only argument against them.
I don't think that !important is inherently bad in terms of how quickly the browser matches rules (it does not form part of the selector, only part of the declaration)
However, as has already been stated, it will reduce the maintainability of your code, and thus likely cause it to grow unnecessarily in size due to future changes. The usage of !important would also likely reduce developer performance.
If you were being really picky, you could also say that !important adds 11 extra bytes to your CSS file, this isn't really much, but I guess if you have a fair few !importants in your stylesheet it could add up.
Just my thoughts, unfortunately I couldn't find any benchmarks on how !important could affect performance.
!important has its place. Trust me on that one. It's saved me many times and is often more useful as a short-term solution, before a longer and more elegant method to your problem can be found.
However, like most things, it's been abused, but there's no need to worry about 'performance'. I'll bet one small 1x1 GIF has more of a performance hit on a web page than !important would.
If you want to optimize your pages, there are many more !important routes to take ;) ;)
What's going on here behind the scenes is that as your CSS is being processed, the browser reads it, encounters an !important attribute, and the browser goes back to apply the styles defined by !important. This extra process might seem like a small additional step, but if you are serving up many requests then you will take a hit in performance. (Source)
Using !important in your CSS usually means developer narcissistic & selfish or lazy. Respect the devs to come...
The thinking of a developer when using !important:
My rocking CSS is not working... grrrr.
What should I do now??
And then !important yeah.... now it's working fine.
However its not a good approach to use !important just because we did not manage the CSS well. It creates lots of design issues -- which are worse than performance issues -- but it also forces us to use many extra lines of code since we are overriding other properties with !important and our CSS becomes cluttered with useless code. What we should do instead is first manage the CSS very well, and not let properties override one another.
We can use !important. But use it sparingly and only when there is no other way out.
I agree with you on not using it because it's bad practice, regardless of performance. On those grounds alone, I'd avoid using !important wherever possible.
But on the question of performance: No, it shouldn't be noticeable. It might have some effect, but it should be so tiny you should never notice it, nor should you worry about it.
If it is significant enough to be noticable then you've likely got bigger problems in your code than just !important. Simple use of a normal syntax element of the core languages you're using is never going to be a performance issue.
Let me answer your question with a retorical question in return; an angle that you probably didn't consider: Which browser do you mean?
Each browser obviously has its own rendering engine, with its own optimisations. So the question now becomes: what are the performance implications in each browser? Perhaps !important performs badly in one browser but really well in another? And perhaps in the next versions, it'll be the other way round?
I guess my point here is that we as web developers shouldn't think about (or need to think about) the performance implications of individual syntax constructs of the languages we're using. We should use those syntax constructs because they're the right way to achieve what we want to do not because of how they perform.
Performance questions should be asked in conjunction with the use of profilers to analyse where the pinch-points are in your system. Fix the things that are truly slowing you down first. There are almost certain to be far far bigger issues for you to fix before you get down to the level of individual CSS constructs.
It does not noticeably affect performance. It does however reduce the maintainability of your code, and therefore is likely to degrade performance in the long run.
Having had to use !important several times before, I have personally noticed no demonstrable performance hit when using it.
As a note see the answer to this stack question for a reason you might want to use !important.
Also I'll mention something that everyone else has failed to mention. !important is the only way to override inline css short of writing a javascript function (which will effect your performance if even only a little bit). So it could actually save you some performance time if you need to override inline css.
hmm... !important or !!important?
Let's go through this step by step:
The Parser has to check for !important for each property, regardless of whether you use it or not - so performance difference here is 0
When overwriting a property, the parser has to check whether the property being overwritten is !important or not - so performance difference here is 0 again
If the property being overwritten is !!important, it has to overwrite the property - performance hit of -1 for not using !important
If the property being overwritten is !important, it skips overwriting the property - performance boost of +1 for using !important
If the new property is !important, the parse has to overwrite it regardless of the property being overwritten is !important or !!important - performance difference 0 again
So I guess !important actually has better performance as it can help parser skip many properties that it won't skip otherwise.
and as #ryan mentions below, the only way to override inline css and avoid using javascript... so another way to avoid an unnecessary performance hit
hmm... turns out out that !important is important
and also,
using !important saves a lot of time for a developer
sometimes saves you from redesigning the whole css
sometimes html or the parent css file is not in your control, so it saves your life there
obviously prevents !important elements from being accidentally overwritten by other !!important elements
and sometimes browsers just don't pick the right properties, without being too specific in selectors, so using !important really becomes important and saves you from writing tonnes of specific css selectors in your css. so i guess even if you use more bytes for writing !important, it could save you bytes in other places. and we all know, css selectors can get messy.
So I guess using !important can make developers happy, and I think that's very important :D
I can't foresee !important impeding performance, not inherently anyway. If, however, your CSS is riddled with !important, that indicates that you've been over qualifying selectors and being too specific and you've run out of parents, or qualifiers to add specificity. Consequently, your CSS will have become bloated (which will impede performance) and difficult to maintain.
If you want to write efficient CSS then you want to be only as specific as you need to be and write modular CSS. It's advisable to refrain from using IDs (with hashes), chaining selectors, or qualifying selectors.
IDs prefixed with # in CSS are viciously specific, to the point where 255 classes won't override an id (fiddle by: #Faust). ID's have a deeper routed problem too though, they have to be unique, this means you can't re-use them for duplicate styles, so you end up writing linear css with repeating styles. The repercussion of doing this will vary project to project, depending on scale, but maintainability will suffer immensely and in edge cases, performance too.
How can you add specificity without !important, chaining, qualifying, or IDs (namely #)
HTML
<div class="eg1-foo">
<p class="eg1-bar">foobar</p>
</div>
<div id="eg2-foo">
<p id="eg2-bar">foobar</p>
</div>
<div class="eg3-foo">
<p class="eg3-foo">foobar</p>
</div>
CSS
.eg1-foo {
color: blue;
}
.eg1-bar {
color: red;
}
[id='eg2-foo'] {
color: blue;
}
[id='eg2-bar'] {
color: red;
}
.eg3-foo {
color: blue;
}
.eg3-foo.eg3-foo {
color: red;
}
JSFiddle
Okay, so how does that work?
The first and second examples work the same, the first is literally a class, and the second is the attribute selector. Classes and Attribute selectors have identical specificity. .eg1/2-bar doesn't inherit its color from .eg1/2-foo because it has its own rule.
The third example looks like qualifying or chaining selectors, but it's neither. Chaining is when you prefix selectors with parents, ancestors, and so on; this adds specificity. Qualifying is similar, but you define the element the selector's applying to. qualifying: ul.class and chaining: ul .class
I'm not sure what you'd call this technique, but the behavior is intentional and is documented by W3C
Repeated occurrances of the same simple selector are allowed and
do increase specificity.
What happens when the specificity between two rules is identical?
As #BoltClock pointed out, If there's multiple !important declarations then
spec dictates that the most specific one should take precedence.
In the example below, both .foo and .bar have identical specificity, so the behavior fallsback to the cascading nature of CSS, whereby the last rule declared in CSS claims precedence i.e. .foo.
HTML
<div>
<p class="foo bar">foobar</p>
</div>
CSS
.bar {
color: blue !important;
}
.foo {
color: red !important;
}
JSFiddle

Is !important bad for performance?

I hate them, it defies the cascading nature of CSS, and if you don't use them with care you end up in a loop of adding more !important.
But I want to know are they bad for performance?
EDIT
From the (fast) replies I can conclude it won't have a (significant) impact on performance.
But it's nice to know, even if it's just as an extra argument for discouraging others ;).
EDIT 2
BoltClock pointed out that if there are 2 !important declarations the specs says it will pick the most specific one.
It shouldn't have any discernible effects on performance. Seeing Firefox's CSS parser at /source/layout/style/nsCSSDataBlock.cpp#572 and I think that is the relevant routine, handling overwriting of CSS rules.
It just seems to be a simple check for "important".
if (aIsImportant) {
if (!HasImportantBit(aPropID))
changed = PR_TRUE;
SetImportantBit(aPropID);
} else {
// ...
}
Also, comments at source/layout/style/nsCSSDataBlock.h#219
/**
* Transfer the state for |aPropID| (which may be a shorthand)
* from |aFromBlock| to this block. The property being transferred
* is !important if |aIsImportant| is true, and should replace an
* existing !important property regardless of its own importance
* if |aOverrideImportant| is true.
*
* ...
*/
Firefox uses a top down parser written manually. In both cases each
CSS file is parsed into a StyleSheet object, each object contains CSS
rules.
Firefox then creates style context trees which contain the end values
(after applying all rules in the right order)
From: http://taligarsiel.com/Projects/howbrowserswork1.htm#CSS_parsing
Now, you can easily see, in such as case with the Object Model described above, the parser can mark the rules affected by the !important easily, without much of a subsequent cost. Performance degradation is not a good argument against !important.
However, maintainability does take a hit (as other answers mentioned), which might be your only argument against them.
I don't think that !important is inherently bad in terms of how quickly the browser matches rules (it does not form part of the selector, only part of the declaration)
However, as has already been stated, it will reduce the maintainability of your code, and thus likely cause it to grow unnecessarily in size due to future changes. The usage of !important would also likely reduce developer performance.
If you were being really picky, you could also say that !important adds 11 extra bytes to your CSS file, this isn't really much, but I guess if you have a fair few !importants in your stylesheet it could add up.
Just my thoughts, unfortunately I couldn't find any benchmarks on how !important could affect performance.
!important has its place. Trust me on that one. It's saved me many times and is often more useful as a short-term solution, before a longer and more elegant method to your problem can be found.
However, like most things, it's been abused, but there's no need to worry about 'performance'. I'll bet one small 1x1 GIF has more of a performance hit on a web page than !important would.
If you want to optimize your pages, there are many more !important routes to take ;) ;)
What's going on here behind the scenes is that as your CSS is being processed, the browser reads it, encounters an !important attribute, and the browser goes back to apply the styles defined by !important. This extra process might seem like a small additional step, but if you are serving up many requests then you will take a hit in performance. (Source)
Using !important in your CSS usually means developer narcissistic & selfish or lazy. Respect the devs to come...
The thinking of a developer when using !important:
My rocking CSS is not working... grrrr.
What should I do now??
And then !important yeah.... now it's working fine.
However its not a good approach to use !important just because we did not manage the CSS well. It creates lots of design issues -- which are worse than performance issues -- but it also forces us to use many extra lines of code since we are overriding other properties with !important and our CSS becomes cluttered with useless code. What we should do instead is first manage the CSS very well, and not let properties override one another.
We can use !important. But use it sparingly and only when there is no other way out.
I agree with you on not using it because it's bad practice, regardless of performance. On those grounds alone, I'd avoid using !important wherever possible.
But on the question of performance: No, it shouldn't be noticeable. It might have some effect, but it should be so tiny you should never notice it, nor should you worry about it.
If it is significant enough to be noticable then you've likely got bigger problems in your code than just !important. Simple use of a normal syntax element of the core languages you're using is never going to be a performance issue.
Let me answer your question with a retorical question in return; an angle that you probably didn't consider: Which browser do you mean?
Each browser obviously has its own rendering engine, with its own optimisations. So the question now becomes: what are the performance implications in each browser? Perhaps !important performs badly in one browser but really well in another? And perhaps in the next versions, it'll be the other way round?
I guess my point here is that we as web developers shouldn't think about (or need to think about) the performance implications of individual syntax constructs of the languages we're using. We should use those syntax constructs because they're the right way to achieve what we want to do not because of how they perform.
Performance questions should be asked in conjunction with the use of profilers to analyse where the pinch-points are in your system. Fix the things that are truly slowing you down first. There are almost certain to be far far bigger issues for you to fix before you get down to the level of individual CSS constructs.
It does not noticeably affect performance. It does however reduce the maintainability of your code, and therefore is likely to degrade performance in the long run.
Having had to use !important several times before, I have personally noticed no demonstrable performance hit when using it.
As a note see the answer to this stack question for a reason you might want to use !important.
Also I'll mention something that everyone else has failed to mention. !important is the only way to override inline css short of writing a javascript function (which will effect your performance if even only a little bit). So it could actually save you some performance time if you need to override inline css.
hmm... !important or !!important?
Let's go through this step by step:
The Parser has to check for !important for each property, regardless of whether you use it or not - so performance difference here is 0
When overwriting a property, the parser has to check whether the property being overwritten is !important or not - so performance difference here is 0 again
If the property being overwritten is !!important, it has to overwrite the property - performance hit of -1 for not using !important
If the property being overwritten is !important, it skips overwriting the property - performance boost of +1 for using !important
If the new property is !important, the parse has to overwrite it regardless of the property being overwritten is !important or !!important - performance difference 0 again
So I guess !important actually has better performance as it can help parser skip many properties that it won't skip otherwise.
and as #ryan mentions below, the only way to override inline css and avoid using javascript... so another way to avoid an unnecessary performance hit
hmm... turns out out that !important is important
and also,
using !important saves a lot of time for a developer
sometimes saves you from redesigning the whole css
sometimes html or the parent css file is not in your control, so it saves your life there
obviously prevents !important elements from being accidentally overwritten by other !!important elements
and sometimes browsers just don't pick the right properties, without being too specific in selectors, so using !important really becomes important and saves you from writing tonnes of specific css selectors in your css. so i guess even if you use more bytes for writing !important, it could save you bytes in other places. and we all know, css selectors can get messy.
So I guess using !important can make developers happy, and I think that's very important :D
I can't foresee !important impeding performance, not inherently anyway. If, however, your CSS is riddled with !important, that indicates that you've been over qualifying selectors and being too specific and you've run out of parents, or qualifiers to add specificity. Consequently, your CSS will have become bloated (which will impede performance) and difficult to maintain.
If you want to write efficient CSS then you want to be only as specific as you need to be and write modular CSS. It's advisable to refrain from using IDs (with hashes), chaining selectors, or qualifying selectors.
IDs prefixed with # in CSS are viciously specific, to the point where 255 classes won't override an id (fiddle by: #Faust). ID's have a deeper routed problem too though, they have to be unique, this means you can't re-use them for duplicate styles, so you end up writing linear css with repeating styles. The repercussion of doing this will vary project to project, depending on scale, but maintainability will suffer immensely and in edge cases, performance too.
How can you add specificity without !important, chaining, qualifying, or IDs (namely #)
HTML
<div class="eg1-foo">
<p class="eg1-bar">foobar</p>
</div>
<div id="eg2-foo">
<p id="eg2-bar">foobar</p>
</div>
<div class="eg3-foo">
<p class="eg3-foo">foobar</p>
</div>
CSS
.eg1-foo {
color: blue;
}
.eg1-bar {
color: red;
}
[id='eg2-foo'] {
color: blue;
}
[id='eg2-bar'] {
color: red;
}
.eg3-foo {
color: blue;
}
.eg3-foo.eg3-foo {
color: red;
}
JSFiddle
Okay, so how does that work?
The first and second examples work the same, the first is literally a class, and the second is the attribute selector. Classes and Attribute selectors have identical specificity. .eg1/2-bar doesn't inherit its color from .eg1/2-foo because it has its own rule.
The third example looks like qualifying or chaining selectors, but it's neither. Chaining is when you prefix selectors with parents, ancestors, and so on; this adds specificity. Qualifying is similar, but you define the element the selector's applying to. qualifying: ul.class and chaining: ul .class
I'm not sure what you'd call this technique, but the behavior is intentional and is documented by W3C
Repeated occurrances of the same simple selector are allowed and
do increase specificity.
What happens when the specificity between two rules is identical?
As #BoltClock pointed out, If there's multiple !important declarations then
spec dictates that the most specific one should take precedence.
In the example below, both .foo and .bar have identical specificity, so the behavior fallsback to the cascading nature of CSS, whereby the last rule declared in CSS claims precedence i.e. .foo.
HTML
<div>
<p class="foo bar">foobar</p>
</div>
CSS
.bar {
color: blue !important;
}
.foo {
color: red !important;
}
JSFiddle

Is there an advantage to using very specific selectors in CSS?

I understand that in jQuery, it's advantageous to be more specific when using selectors so that jQuery doesn't have to traverse the entire DOM to find what you're looking for. For example, $('span.description') is better than just $('.description') if I know that the description class is only ever applied to <span> elements.
Is this the case with CSS, too? Is there any specific advantage for me to use span.description { } instead of .description { }? I'm thinking in terms of speed, optimization, etc. Am I saving the browser any work by telling it exactly where to look?
This is true in CSS -
A good rule is to descend from the nearest ID.
IDs are indexed so locating them is extremely fast. There is no reason to use more than one in your selector.
Google Code- Optimize browser rendering
This answered a lot of questions I had on the subject including this one-
I hope you find it useful.
Read up on css specificity - which is the most important reason to be more or less specific with your css.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/cascade.html#specificity
As browser performance is pretty much a non-issue (except for in jquery, as you've mentioned), my guideline is to be specific when you are controlling precedence, or when you want to make something a bit more readable in your css. Over specifying can make it tricky to re-use css selectors and make things overly complicated.
Edit
This looks like a bit of a duplicate:
CSS Performance Question
it always depends on your amount of html code and the structure. It is definitely a good idea to use especially ids and appropriate selectors. (ie #nav li instead of li.nav). Since browser first load the html and then apply the css you are helping a lot.
This said, when it comes to pure css (no jquery) the difference in speed is nowadays not easy to distinguish, because the rendering engines are highly optimized - especially when it comes to applying css. So normally it shouldn't matter.
As far as I know, how specific your selectors are make very little difference on the performance.
The two areas where more specific selectors are most useful, is to reduce the risk that it's not applied where you don't want it, and to make one selector take precedence over another.
A more specific rule has precedence over a less specific rule, so:
span.myclass {}
has precedence over:
.myclass {}
(no matter what the order is in which the rules were declared)

CSS Selector Style

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.

CSS coding style [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Are there any good CSS coding style/standards?
Here is a good one:
http://www.phpied.com/css-coding-conventions/
But the important thing is to pick something and stick with it for consistency.
I agree with most of the points at Andrew Hare's link, but I strongly believe
.class-name {
color: green;
}
is inferior to:
.class-name
{
color: green;
}
on the grounds that:
.class-name, .class-name2 {
color: green;
}
or:
.class-name,
.class-name2 {
color: green;
}
are considerably less obvious to grep or read than:
.class-name,
.class-name2
{
color: green;
}
There's no standard standard, as it were. There are most certainly plenty of in-house standards and conventions. And there are certainly known best practices.
I stick to the following:
Structure your CSS according to it's purpose
That may involve separating out CSS concerns into different files (layout.css, colors.css etc). This may just as well involve clearly dividing up a single CSS file into clear sections along the same lines.
Be as specific as possible
Selectors have differing weights. ID-based selectors are more specific than class-based selectors. Chained selectors (e.g. body div#container div#content p) are very specific indeed.
Start out being as specific as you can, even if it appears you're being too specific. It's quite easy, later down the line, to merge together two very specific style definitions by removing one and making the other less specific.
A style definition with loose specificity may target elements you did not intend in ways that are not immediately apparent or obvious. I think this is the most common cause of CSS frustrations ("Why on earth will this div not let me set a top margin?")
Always specify every single style you wish to apply for a given defintion
For example, if you want all your paragraphs to have pink text, set the text colour to pink and also set the margins/padding/background colour/font and so on.
Don't rely on browser defaults to be suitably consistent. Certainly for the most commonly used elements the main browsers tend to use very similar if not identical default styling.
If you set all the relevant styles yourself you know what the end result should be.
If you only set those styles that are most immediately obvious, the end result will be (most likely) a combination of the browser defaults and your styles. This will eventually catch you out at some point. I think this is the second most common cause of CSS frustrations.
Use ids for styling unique elements
It's generally a good idea to apply an id attribute to any unique element that is going to be interacted with in any way. For CSS this will let you apply suitably specific styles more easily.
Use an id on a unique page
Pages that are significantly different in style and layout to the majority (homepage, search results, 404) should have an id on the body element. This gives you the specificity you need to ensure that your careful homepage styling doesn't get affected by styles you later apply to some internal content page.
Pretty coding style VS site speed
I've been working with pretty huge CSS files, and found out some pretty interesting things that I've never read about before.
#import
One thing is using #import. That's actually a bottleneck - by going away from using #import completely, the site got a lot more snappy.
#every .style { in one line }
When the browser reads a document, it reads line by line, so by switching from my pretty coding style to this, I accomplished 2 things;
A even more snappy site
Less scrolling, better overview. Why? Cause I first scroll down to find the style I'm going to work with, then it's all in the same line and it's not hard to scroll your eyes along the line to find what you're looking for.
The main good coding style is to actually separate css files according to their goals.
See Progressive Enhancement.
That way, whatever coding convention you will choose, you will have consistent and manageable separate css files... easier to debug.
When I code in CSS:
In first part I write the class and id
In last part I write the general element (p, font, etc) because the class and id have more importance for inheritance
I write comment if I want a particular behaviour with IE or with MoSE Browser
You can see some example in CSS Zen Garden
Generally I insert the most important elements over the other: if there's
p.important{/*features of a class*/}
p {/*features of a general element */}
Reading the CSS file I know the format rules before about the most particular elements, after the rules about the most general elements.
It's an habit in programming Java.
Put your css rules (ex: "color: red;") in alphabetical order and also put your selectors (ex: "div { color: red; }") in order they appear in your markup. Separate code for structure from skin.
Just from experience I used to write quite long CSS style sheets. Now my style sheets typically are half a page.
So keep it simple(KISS), line based (greppable) and keep it compact (use font: instead of font-size etc etc.).
Also I highly recommend using CSSlint to check your code for fluff.
Check Sass out. It's a template language for CSS that makes your source code DRY:er and mucho easy to read. Even if you're not using ruby you can use it for this task and automate the building of your css files from Sass source. And there are probably Sass implementations in other languages too.
There's probably loads. At our work we use the following:
/* =div a comment about my div */
div#mydiv {
border:1px solid #000;
}
The =div allows us to search against all div elements by using the search functionality. There's loads more though, I've used many different variations of this in the past.
In addition to what others said, remember that the C stands for 'Cascading', i.e. subelements inherit from top level elements. Sound simple and straight away. But I have often seen CSS files that contain redundant declarations, e.g. for font styles. This makes a CSS more complex and hard to maintain.
So before you add something to your CSS make sure that it is not redundant, i.e. check parent elements and remove redundant declarations from children.
Given this you should organize your CSS in a way so that high level elements (like declarations for the body class) are mentioned first and more specialized elements last.
This might also be helpful, a few tips to keep your CSS styles DRY - as in "Don't Repeat Yourself" link text
I will strongly recommend looking at Less: http://lesscss.org
While not really a standard, it has been gaining a lot of momentum recently. Less is css extension that runs in the browser bringing variables and functions into the language and therefore allowing templating.

Resources