Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Rules for Forrest Use of class-Attributes
From: Thorsten Scherler <thorsten@apache.org>
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <43C257D3.5040306@apache.org>
References: <1259972703.20060105085557@soethe.net>
	 <43BD0FB0.9020400@apache.org> <498680340.20060106204054@soethe.net>
	 <43C257D3.5040306@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 14:18:25 +0100
Message-Id: <1136812705.10292.34.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

El lun, 09-01-2006 a las 12:32 +0000, Ross Gardler escribió:

...
> > One reason to come up with the prefix-scheme was to avoid long
> > prefixed like "forrest-" in the future. While I'm usually much in
> > favour of speaking names, here I would strongly object because we
> > would really increase the overhead of each page when we carry long
> > class-names in every generated element.
> 
> So use "for-" instead ;-)
> 

+1

> >>I'm not at all sure of the benefits of using the expanded name prefixes
> >>you define below. It just seems complex. Particularly when we remember
> >>that classes in, for example, the tabs may be reused in the body.
> > 
> > 
> > Seems to me like one more reason to have prefixes. Why would you have
> > the same class name for two very differnt parts of a page?
> 
> I meant that "for-highlight" might appear in the tabs and in the body 
> but is still the same hint in both locations. In your example names you 
> had things like "for-tabs-*" and "for-body-*", I interpreted this to 
> mean my hightligh class would become two hints with identical CSS meanings.
> 
> However, you are saying that it may have a different meaning in the tabs 
> as to the body. I don't think this is not a problem though, CSS allows 
> you do define different definitions depending on where the class is found.
> 
> Thorsten has already done some work on CSS naming conventions (long time 
> ago now). I'd suggest scouring the archives and seeing what he 
> suggested. My vague recollections are that it was quite similar to your 
> proposal here. Things will have changed a bit because we now have the 
> dispatcher (which incorporates many of those original ideas).
> 

http://forrest.apache.org/docs_0_80/views.html
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/forrest/trunk/main/webapp/skins/leather-dev/brainstorming.txt?view=markup
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/forrest/trunk/main/webapp/skins/leather-dev/contracts.initial.txt?view=markup

Contracts are following already this convention.

HTH

salu2
-- 
thorsten

"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)