Ticket

+status
+priority
+commit
 
+issues

want to separate form and function css a bit.

 

+solution

We can (and will) do more CSS cleanup en route to a real skinning solution, but as of Wagn 1.10 the main changes are:

  • default installation now has blank *css
  • only one direct url reference in built-in CSS (to jquery icons)
  • default CSS substantially simplified in keeping with simplified/standardized views
  • greater use of HTML5 tags

 

 

This ticket is from April 2009. Didn't we do a major CSS cleanup since then? Did it separate form and function at all? --John


In other words, should we close this?

  --John Abbe.....Thu Jan 27 22:20:00 -0800 2011


Now there's a narrower ticket, update wrapper CSS for current terminology and maybe more. Is this one still relevant, and if so could it be explicated a bit?

  --John Abbe.....Fri Feb 11 20:19:02 -0800 2011


That ticket is about changing the css identifiers in the html. I'm talking about cleaning up the actual css files. Agree this is a bit vague. May add more soon.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Sun Feb 13 14:01:03 -0800 2011


Seems like that would be easier (e.g., for me and perhaps others to help) if we first move the files to Wagn itself now that we can do file formats, yes? I guess that will be on English, right? And we'll want to arrange and document things so that the CSS people customize is in cards separate from (and applied after) those with CSS we will want to migrate.

  --John Abbe.....Sun Feb 13 14:13:52 -0800 2011


to that end, ticket store CSS in cards?

  --John Abbe.....Sun Feb 13 14:15:05 -0800 2011


We definitely want to do something like that eventually, but there are several reasons not to rush it:

 

1. it's a ton harder to update css through a migration than through a file update

2. there is some functional stuff in the css that we don't really want to make it easy for folks to break. (part of the point of this ticket is to separate that out) Not saying we don't want eventually to allow it, but should be done with a plan in mind.

3. we haven't really figured out how skins are going to work, but making the transition will probably be harder from cards than from files.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Sun Feb 13 17:17:27 -0800 2011


Thx, I was confused I guess thinking the point of the file-type thing was to be able to put CSS in cards soonish. I will however add an idea for implement an interface for changing skins.

  --John Abbe.....Sun Feb 13 17:37:06 -0800 2011


awesome.

 

You're right that we wanted to be able to put css in cards, but I was thinking that would be *additional* css rather than the default css. So, for example, you could override the default print settings or whatever else.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Sun Feb 13 17:41:12 -0800 2011


So, something like *cssprint and *cssmobile? (reading a bit I see that general practice is to do *all* mobile styling via CSS, which certainly would be easier to implement than the road I started down of a different custom layout)

 

What else?

  --John Abbe.....Sun Feb 13 17:46:49 -0800 2011


I'm going to close this (because 1.10 does have a lot of css cleanup in it) and draw the relevant parts of the discussion into skinning tickets.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....2012-12-20 21:13:35 +0000