How I write CSS selectors
There's many CSS methodologies out there, and I hate them all. Some more (tailwind & al.) and some less (BEM, OOCSS, etc.). But at the end of the day, they all have flaws.
People use these approaches for good reasons, of course, and many of the problems addressed are ones I have also encountered. So in this post, I'd like to write down my own guidelines for how I keep CSS organised.
This isn't a fully described CSS methodology that anyone could just start using. Maybe it could be turned into one with some extra work, but the purpose of this post is simply to show how I make these decisions when writing CSS.
Builtin Elements
As a rule of thumb, I try to use builtin element types as much as possible, and with as little extra fluff as possible.
Having a need for a thousand different types of button is a sign that there might be something wrong with the design on a deeper level, so while in some cases I get the appeal of CSS being inert until framework-specific classes are used, in most cases I see it as ideal when a button is just and looks like a button without any further magic.
div.btton should turn into button
Custom Elements
Not all design elements have a semantically fitting HTML equivalent, and for these cases, I usually resort to custom elements.
I haven't seen many instances of custom element names being used without any accompanying javascript, but it has proven to be a surprisingly solid choice for writing clear HTML that also looks the way I want.
Entirely separate elements in terms of design are also more likely to, over time, develop requirements that can only be implemented with JavaScript, which leaves you with a clear path to implementing those that doesn't need any changes in the HTML nor the CSS.
div.vsep should turn into vertical-separator
Classes
Classes should work as modifiers of the existing node name, rather than entirely new element types, and often have similar but different effects on different element types.
A dangerous button is a button.danger
Attributes
Some ways of modifying elements aren't simple on/off switches that classes are useful for, but behave more like key-value pairs.
In these cases, custom attributes with matching selectors have proven to be the best option almost every time I've used them. Unlike hyphenated classes, they show on a syntax-level which is the attribute and which is the value, making it easier for editors to highlight them, easier for the human eye to quickly parse, and easier to interface using JavaScript.
For those of us who still have hope that the attr() function might one day make its way into CSS for more than just content, this is also an extra layer of future-proofing.
IDs
IDs are, by definition, unique inside the document. As such, any rule targeting a particular ID will be limited and may require refactoring if it later turns out there should be more than one element of this type on the lage after all.
As such, IDs should be used sparingly and only when it makes no sense to ever have more than one element in one document.
The benefits over classes in both a practical and readability sense are rather small, so erring on the side of classes is usually the best idea when no clear 1-to-1 relation between element and styling can be identified.
Inline CSS
Any real-world application will at some point have elements that simply require individual tweaking in order to make them more aesthetically pleasing in the context they appear in.
In these cases, the style attribute is the way to go. Any reason why using it is considered bad practice applies to any sort of inline-styling, including utility classes. The problem isn't the attribute, it's mixing styling and markup.
The one difference between style and class for inlining styles is that one indicates purpose, allows using plain CSS and is mostly universal, while the other isn't.
Put simply, width: 100px has a universally defined meaning, whille .width-100 could mean anything.
Utility Classes
In very rare occasions, element-specific styles get so complex that inlining them explicitly would harm readability, or is even impossible (for example if it requires media queries).
In these cases, utility classes are basically the only option, even if they're ugly.
In an ideal world, these could be handled separately from specific mixin classes, and I have even considered using prefixing to more easily tell them apart, but ultimately haven't found a good way to make these not be ugly.
I like the idea of prefixing utility classes with a + to represent that they add some sort of functionality to the element, in contrast to normal classes, that specify what type of an element is.
And that was about it. Of course, no two projects are the same, and sometimes rules have to be bent a little to remain practical, but overall, that's my framework for deciding how to make a thing on the screen look a certain way.
What are your thoughts? Do you hate it? Do you think it makes sense? Let me know in a comment ?
以上是How I write CSS selectors的詳細內容。更多資訊請關注PHP中文網其他相關文章!

熱AI工具

Undresser.AI Undress
人工智慧驅動的應用程序,用於創建逼真的裸體照片

AI Clothes Remover
用於從照片中去除衣服的線上人工智慧工具。

Undress AI Tool
免費脫衣圖片

Clothoff.io
AI脫衣器

Video Face Swap
使用我們完全免費的人工智慧換臉工具,輕鬆在任何影片中換臉!

熱門文章

熱工具

記事本++7.3.1
好用且免費的程式碼編輯器

SublimeText3漢化版
中文版,非常好用

禪工作室 13.0.1
強大的PHP整合開發環境

Dreamweaver CS6
視覺化網頁開發工具

SublimeText3 Mac版
神級程式碼編輯軟體(SublimeText3)

您是否曾經在項目上需要一個倒計時計時器?對於這樣的東西,可以自然訪問插件,但實際上更多

在元素個數不固定的情況下如何通過CSS選擇第一個指定類名的子元素在處理HTML結構時,常常會遇到元素個數不�...

關於Flex佈局中紫色斜線區域的疑問在使用Flex佈局時,你可能會遇到一些令人困惑的現象,比如在開發者工具(d...

格子呢是一塊圖案布,通常與蘇格蘭有關,尤其是他們時尚的蘇格蘭語。在Tartanify.com上,我們收集了5,000多個格子呢
