asked May 06 '10

My initial thought was - mark up all pure content elements with some naming convention. For example ab_q_title would be class name for question title, or ab_query_id id of search query input element. Postfix _id would make id's distinct from classes.

The question is - should we also have some mandatory structural blocks? I.e. container types that would group elements like question title, question toolbar (with delete, edit, etc. links), etc.

Originally I though that we shouldn't because structure items like that enforce layout which will make building alternative layouts harder.

What do you think?

1 Answer

Sort by » oldest newest most voted

Evgeny has selected this answer as correct

answered May 07 '10

Pekka
500 ● 19 ● 26 ● 34

updated May 07 '10

Yes, wrappers would be a great thing! I've already come across a few bumps while customizing the default template where a wrapper DIV would have come in very handy.

I think it's possible to make those wrappers "layout neutral" - if necessary, by forcing a "display: inline" on them while customizing. It will require changing two classes instead of just one in case of deeper customizations, but that is an okay price to pay IMO.

link

Comments

we can probably re-use them too. I don't think you can make any container layout neutral though, without some absolute positioning tricks. For example a layout for mobile device version will probably very different - e.g. all the little links will be best taken outside into a separate toolbox. Evgeny (May 07 '10)

@Pekka, maybe we should add a separate marker class for container? or it will be overkill? Evgeny (May 07 '10)

@Evgeny can you specify what you mean by the separate marker class? You mean a specific class that is applied to all containers? Pekka (May 07 '10)

Question tools

Stats

Asked: May 06 '10

Seen: 592 times

Last updated: May 07 '10

Should we have any mandatory stuctural elements in skins?

1 Answer

Comments

Your answer

Question tools

Stats

Related questions