You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by Chris Collins <ch...@me.com> on 2011/12/06 06:48:57 UTC
smarter css
So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
Random thoughts:
- You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
- Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
again sorry for dumb questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
I'm looking forward to integrating these! I think using the raw
processor may fit into Tapestry's overall lifecycle best.
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Alex Objelean <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just a small note:
>
> you can reuse the provided processors (like LessCssProcessor,
> CoffeeScriptProcessor, SassCssProcessor, etc)
> without being forced to use a filter or a maven plugin. The processors
> interface is pretty simple and can be used like this:
>
> new CoffeeScriptProcessor().process(Reader reader, Writer writer);
>
> Similar usage is available for other processors and there are
> http://code.google.com/p/wro4j/wiki/AvailableProcessors plenty of them .
>
> Cheers,
> Alex
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/smarter-css-tp5051068p5062698.html
> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Alex Objelean <al...@gmail.com>.
Just a small note:
you can reuse the provided processors (like LessCssProcessor,
CoffeeScriptProcessor, SassCssProcessor, etc)
without being forced to use a filter or a maven plugin. The processors
interface is pretty simple and can be used like this:
new CoffeeScriptProcessor().process(Reader reader, Writer writer);
Similar usage is available for other processors and there are
http://code.google.com/p/wro4j/wiki/AvailableProcessors plenty of them .
Cheers,
Alex
--
View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/smarter-css-tp5051068p5062698.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Didn't describe things quite right; wro4j works as a filter at
runtime, but still assumes a static description of what needs
combining/transforming/compiling/etc. In a Tapestry application, that
all needs to be figured out dynamically, on the fly, based on the
what's in the framework, application, and 3rd party libraries.
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Alex Objelean <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually it is geared for runtime solution as well. There is no difference in
> using less or coffeeScript (or sass, or any other available processors) for
> a runtime or build time solution.
>
> Cheers,
> Alex
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/smarter-css-tp5051068p5060273.html
> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Alex Objelean <al...@gmail.com>.
Actually it is geared for runtime solution as well. There is no difference in
using less or coffeeScript (or sass, or any other available processors) for
a runtime or build time solution.
Cheers,
Alex
--
View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/smarter-css-tp5051068p5060273.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Andreas Fink <fi...@googlemail.com>.
Sorry for my hasty and not well formulated rant.
I was just thinking about the announcment of the Rails-team to switch to Coffeescript and what an impact that has on developers and existing apps.
There is always that compromise between flexibility and high-level tools but as the server side of Tapestry focusses so much on flexibilty/modularity i think it would make sense to follow that route also for the browser side.
All this highly sofisticated tools (eg: sass, activerecord, hibernate, ...) cover maybe 90% of the use cases but become a major road block if they cannot easily be circumvented for the other 10%.
Cheers,
Andi.
On Dec 8, 2011, at 2:13 , Chris Collins wrote:
> Is prototype a good comparison here? It seems that both the tools mentions here somewhat become an extension to the template engine "server side" part of the T5 equation.
>
> After quickly playing with Tapestry-jquery it wasn't a case of "getting rid of" prototype, but adding safely jquery. I certainly want to use javascript libraries that use both prototype and jquery. I can imagine that one day there maybe extensions for tapestry that incorporate not only these competing js libraries but potentially leverage competing css macro languages like less and sass. I guess I personally wouldn't care too much if it was one or the other but it certainly would be nice if as a component of tapestry you could perhaps have them as components that can co-exist in their own namespace.
>
> 1 1/2 cents worth.
>
> C
> On Dec 7, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Andreas Fink wrote:
>
>> Please do not include this kind of technologies in the core.
>> It took us long enough to get rid of prototype.js.
>> Sure, it can be overridden but why not just offer it as part of an external CoolKidsJavascriptStack.
>>
>> Just my 2c.
>> Andi.
>>
>> On Dec 8, 2011, at 1:15 , Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>
>>> Less or SCSS are both promising, but I'd love to see it integrated
>>> into tapestry-core so that it could be used for Tapestry's default
>>> stylesheet.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Greg Pagendam-Turner
>>> <gr...@liftyourgame.com> wrote:
>>>> Hey Howard what about less?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08/12/11 04:49, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing we need to do is support SASS (http://sass-lang.com/) so
>>>>> that we can code concise& configurable SASS stylesheets and let
>>>>>
>>>>> Tapestry expand them into ugly, redundant CSS for the client web
>>>>> browser.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to
>>>>>> read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Bob.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> C
>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
>>>>>>> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
>>>>>>> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <body>
>>>>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>>>>> <div class="ie-old">
>>>>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>>>>> </div>
>>>>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>>>>> </body>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
>>>>>>> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DIV.menu {
>>>>>>> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
>>>>>>> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hope this helps...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped
>>>>>>>> standardize cross browser support :-}
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier
>>>>>>>> IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as
>>>>>>>> using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would
>>>>>>>> want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image
>>>>>>>> case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional
>>>>>>>> method there is a technique proposed in:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am
>>>>>>>> talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE.
>>>>>>>> Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the
>>>>>>>> only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data
>>>>>>>> crunching like engineering :-}
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its
>>>>>>>>> not just gradients.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout
>>>>>>>>>> component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not
>>>>>>>>> perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it
>>>>>>>>> if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the
>>>>>>>>> various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be
>>>>>>>>> ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might
>>>>>>>>> encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need
>>>>>>>>> for detection.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: "Chris Collins"<ch...@me.com>
>>>>>>>>> To: "Tapestry users"<us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>>>>>>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just
>>>>>>>>> things like gradients:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background
>>>>>>>>> you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to
>>>>>>>>> add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as
>>>>>>>>> the best strategy?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Random thoughts:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts
>>>>>>>>> of it by browser right?
>>>>>>>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build
>>>>>>>>> inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>>
>>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>>
>>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>>
>>> (971) 678-5210
>>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Chris Collins <ch...@me.com>.
Is prototype a good comparison here? It seems that both the tools mentions here somewhat become an extension to the template engine "server side" part of the T5 equation.
After quickly playing with Tapestry-jquery it wasn't a case of "getting rid of" prototype, but adding safely jquery. I certainly want to use javascript libraries that use both prototype and jquery. I can imagine that one day there maybe extensions for tapestry that incorporate not only these competing js libraries but potentially leverage competing css macro languages like less and sass. I guess I personally wouldn't care too much if it was one or the other but it certainly would be nice if as a component of tapestry you could perhaps have them as components that can co-exist in their own namespace.
1 1/2 cents worth.
C
On Dec 7, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Andreas Fink wrote:
> Please do not include this kind of technologies in the core.
> It took us long enough to get rid of prototype.js.
> Sure, it can be overridden but why not just offer it as part of an external CoolKidsJavascriptStack.
>
> Just my 2c.
> Andi.
>
> On Dec 8, 2011, at 1:15 , Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>
>> Less or SCSS are both promising, but I'd love to see it integrated
>> into tapestry-core so that it could be used for Tapestry's default
>> stylesheet.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Greg Pagendam-Turner
>> <gr...@liftyourgame.com> wrote:
>>> Hey Howard what about less?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/12/11 04:49, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>>>
>>>> One thing we need to do is support SASS (http://sass-lang.com/) so
>>>> that we can code concise& configurable SASS stylesheets and let
>>>>
>>>> Tapestry expand them into ugly, redundant CSS for the client web
>>>> browser.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to
>>>>> read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Bob.
>>>>>
>>>>> C
>>>>> On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
>>>>>> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
>>>>>> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <body>
>>>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>>>> <div class="ie-old">
>>>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>>>> ....
>>>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>>>> </div>
>>>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>>>> </body>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
>>>>>> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DIV.menu {
>>>>>> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
>>>>>> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hope this helps...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped
>>>>>>> standardize cross browser support :-}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier
>>>>>>> IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as
>>>>>>> using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would
>>>>>>> want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image
>>>>>>> case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional
>>>>>>> method there is a technique proposed in:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am
>>>>>>> talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE.
>>>>>>> Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the
>>>>>>> only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data
>>>>>>> crunching like engineering :-}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its
>>>>>>>> not just gradients.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout
>>>>>>>>> component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not
>>>>>>>> perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it
>>>>>>>> if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the
>>>>>>>> various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be
>>>>>>>> ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might
>>>>>>>> encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need
>>>>>>>> for detection.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: "Chris Collins"<ch...@me.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Tapestry users"<us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>>>>>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just
>>>>>>>> things like gradients:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background
>>>>>>>> you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to
>>>>>>>> add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as
>>>>>>>> the best strategy?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Random thoughts:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts
>>>>>>>> of it by browser right?
>>>>>>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build
>>>>>>>> inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>
>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>
>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>
>> (971) 678-5210
>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
That's a debate; for instance, tapestry-core could use SCSS and
CoffeeScript, but use build-time tools to convert those into standard
CSS and JS. Less convenient for use T5 developers though.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Lenny Primak <lp...@hope.nyc.ny.us> wrote:
> but doesn't it kinda have to be in the core so the core CSS can use it?
>
> On Dec 7, 2011, at 7:57 PM, Andreas Fink wrote:
>
>> Please do not include this kind of technologies in the core.
>> It took us long enough to get rid of prototype.js.
>> Sure, it can be overridden but why not just offer it as part of an external CoolKidsJavascriptStack.
>>
>> Just my 2c.
>> Andi.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Lenny Primak <lp...@hope.nyc.ny.us>.
but doesn't it kinda have to be in the core so the core CSS can use it?
On Dec 7, 2011, at 7:57 PM, Andreas Fink wrote:
> Please do not include this kind of technologies in the core.
> It took us long enough to get rid of prototype.js.
> Sure, it can be overridden but why not just offer it as part of an external CoolKidsJavascriptStack.
>
> Just my 2c.
> Andi.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Andreas Fink <fi...@googlemail.com>.
Please do not include this kind of technologies in the core.
It took us long enough to get rid of prototype.js.
Sure, it can be overridden but why not just offer it as part of an external CoolKidsJavascriptStack.
Just my 2c.
Andi.
On Dec 8, 2011, at 1:15 , Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> Less or SCSS are both promising, but I'd love to see it integrated
> into tapestry-core so that it could be used for Tapestry's default
> stylesheet.
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Greg Pagendam-Turner
> <gr...@liftyourgame.com> wrote:
>> Hey Howard what about less?
>>
>>
>> On 08/12/11 04:49, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>>
>>> One thing we need to do is support SASS (http://sass-lang.com/) so
>>> that we can code concise& configurable SASS stylesheets and let
>>>
>>> Tapestry expand them into ugly, redundant CSS for the client web
>>> browser.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to
>>>> read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Bob.
>>>>
>>>> C
>>>> On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
>>>>> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
>>>>> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> <body>
>>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>>> <div class="ie-old">
>>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>>> ....
>>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>>> </div>
>>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>>> </body>
>>>>>
>>>>> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
>>>>> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>>>>>
>>>>> DIV.menu {
>>>>> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
>>>>> }
>>>>> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
>>>>> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope this helps...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped
>>>>>> standardize cross browser support :-}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier
>>>>>> IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as
>>>>>> using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would
>>>>>> want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image
>>>>>> case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional
>>>>>> method there is a technique proposed in:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am
>>>>>> talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE.
>>>>>> Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the
>>>>>> only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data
>>>>>> crunching like engineering :-}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>
>>>>>> C
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its
>>>>>>> not just gradients.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout
>>>>>>>> component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not
>>>>>>> perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it
>>>>>>> if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the
>>>>>>> various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be
>>>>>>> ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might
>>>>>>> encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need
>>>>>>> for detection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: "Chris Collins"<ch...@me.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Tapestry users"<us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>>>>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just
>>>>>>> things like gradients:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background
>>>>>>> you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to
>>>>>>> add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as
>>>>>>> the best strategy?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Random thoughts:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts
>>>>>>> of it by browser right?
>>>>>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build
>>>>>>> inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Less or SCSS are both promising, but I'd love to see it integrated
into tapestry-core so that it could be used for Tapestry's default
stylesheet.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Greg Pagendam-Turner
<gr...@liftyourgame.com> wrote:
> Hey Howard what about less?
>
>
> On 08/12/11 04:49, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>
>> One thing we need to do is support SASS (http://sass-lang.com/) so
>> that we can code concise& configurable SASS stylesheets and let
>>
>> Tapestry expand them into ugly, redundant CSS for the client web
>> browser.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to
>>> read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
>>>
>>> Thanks Bob.
>>>
>>> C
>>> On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
>>>> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
>>>> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>>>>
>>>> <body>
>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>> <div class="ie-old">
>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>> ....
>>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>>> </div>
>>>> <![endif]-->
>>>> </body>
>>>>
>>>> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
>>>> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>>>>
>>>> DIV.menu {
>>>> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
>>>> }
>>>> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
>>>> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Hope this helps...
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped
>>>>> standardize cross browser support :-}
>>>>>
>>>>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier
>>>>> IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as
>>>>> using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would
>>>>> want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image
>>>>> case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional
>>>>> method there is a technique proposed in:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am
>>>>> talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>>>>
>>>>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE.
>>>>> Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the
>>>>> only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data
>>>>> crunching like engineering :-}
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>>
>>>>> C
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its
>>>>>> not just gradients.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout
>>>>>>> component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not
>>>>>> perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it
>>>>>> if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the
>>>>>> various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be
>>>>>> ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might
>>>>>> encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need
>>>>>> for detection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Chris Collins"<ch...@me.com>
>>>>>> To: "Tapestry users"<us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>>>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just
>>>>>> things like gradients:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background
>>>>>> you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to
>>>>>> add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as
>>>>>> the best strategy?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Random thoughts:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts
>>>>>> of it by browser right?
>>>>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build
>>>>>> inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Greg Pagendam-Turner <gr...@liftyourgame.com>.
Hey Howard what about less?
On 08/12/11 04:49, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> One thing we need to do is support SASS (http://sass-lang.com/) so
> that we can code concise& configurable SASS stylesheets and let
> Tapestry expand them into ugly, redundant CSS for the client web
> browser.
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>> Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
>>
>> Thanks Bob.
>>
>> C
>> On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
>>
>>> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
>>> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
>>> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>>>
>>> <body>
>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>> <div class="ie-old">
>>> <![endif]-->
>>> ....
>>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>>> </div>
>>> <![endif]-->
>>> </body>
>>>
>>> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
>>> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>>>
>>> DIV.menu {
>>> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
>>> }
>>> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
>>> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
>>> }
>>>
>>> Hope this helps...
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins<ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped standardize cross browser support :-}
>>>>
>>>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional method there is a technique proposed in:
>>>>
>>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>>>
>>>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>>>
>>>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE. Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data crunching like engineering :-}
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> C
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its not just gradients.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need for detection.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Chris Collins"<ch...@me.com>
>>>>> To: "Tapestry users"<us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>>>
>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>>>
>>>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>>
>>>>> Random thoughts:
>>>>>
>>>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
>>>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>>>
>>>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>>>
>>>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
One thing we need to do is support SASS (http://sass-lang.com/) so
that we can code concise & configurable SASS stylesheets and let
Tapestry expand them into ugly, redundant CSS for the client web
browser.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Chris Collins <ch...@me.com> wrote:
> Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
>
> Thanks Bob.
>
> C
> On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
>
>> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
>> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
>> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>>
>> <body>
>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>> <div class="ie-old">
>> <![endif]-->
>> ....
>> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
>> </div>
>> <![endif]-->
>> </body>
>>
>> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
>> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>>
>> DIV.menu {
>> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
>> }
>> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
>> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
>> }
>>
>> Hope this helps...
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins <ch...@me.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped standardize cross browser support :-}
>>>
>>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional method there is a technique proposed in:
>>>
>>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>>
>>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>>
>>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE. Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>>
>>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data crunching like engineering :-}
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> C
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its not just gradients.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need for detection.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>
>>>> From: "Chris Collins" <ch...@me.com>
>>>> To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>>
>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
>>>>
>>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>>
>>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>>
>>>> Random thoughts:
>>>>
>>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
>>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>>
>>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>>
>>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Chris Collins <ch...@me.com>.
Makes sense. Working in Java for too long has made me soft. I need to read some c code to repent for my sins ;-}
Thanks Bob.
C
On Dec 6, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Bob Harner wrote:
> Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
> is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
> body in my layout.tml, like this:
>
> <body>
> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
> <div class="ie-old">
> <![endif]-->
> ....
> <!--[if lt IE 9]>
> </div>
> <![endif]-->
> </body>
>
> Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
> IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
>
> DIV.menu {
> /* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
> }
> DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
> /* some IE-specific rules go here */
> }
>
> Hope this helps...
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins <ch...@me.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped standardize cross browser support :-}
>>
>> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional method there is a technique proposed in:
>>
>> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>>
>> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>>
>> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE. Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>>
>> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data crunching like engineering :-}
>>
>> Best
>>
>> C
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chris,
>>>
>>>
>>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its not just gradients.
>>>
>>>
>>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need for detection.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>
>>> From: "Chris Collins" <ch...@me.com>
>>> To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>>> Subject: smarter css
>>>
>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
>>>
>>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>>
>>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>>
>>> Random thoughts:
>>>
>>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
>>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
>>>
>>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>>
>>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com>.
Rather than having separate IE-only style sheets, a technique I prefer
is to use IE conditional comments to add an additional div around the
body in my layout.tml, like this:
<body>
<!--[if lt IE 9]>
<div class="ie-old">
<![endif]-->
....
<!--[if lt IE 9]>
</div>
<![endif]-->
</body>
Once that's done, then it becomes trivially easy to add all sorts of
IE-specific CSS rules in your app's main (or only) style sheet file:
DIV.menu {
/* CSS rules for most browsers go here */
}
DIV.ie-old DIV.menu {
/* some IE-specific rules go here */
}
Hope this helps...
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Chris Collins <ch...@me.com> wrote:
> Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped standardize cross browser support :-}
>
> So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional method there is a technique proposed in:
>
> http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
>
> Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
>
> This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE. Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
>
> Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data crunching like engineering :-}
>
> Best
>
> C
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>>
>>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
>> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its not just gradients.
>>
>>
>>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need for detection.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: "Chris Collins" <ch...@me.com>
>> To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
>> Subject: smarter css
>>
>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
>>
>> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>>
>> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>>
>> Random thoughts:
>>
>> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
>> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
>>
>> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>>
>> again sorry for dumb questions.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Chris Collins <ch...@me.com>.
Thanks Peter, makes total sense. I am so happy that css3 helped standardize cross browser support :-}
So I probably would want to detect a non HTML5 browser such as earlier IE's with something that would throw in to the css another technique such as using a gradient filled image file (in this example)? I don't think I would want to throw in the technique of last resort because in the gradient image case it would compete with the html5 technique right? For the conditional method there is a technique proposed in:
http://tapestry.apache.org/css.html
Of course I am actually not literally talking about gradient fills I am talking about the general new vs old vs cross browser css challenge.
This client side commenting conditional logic seems to be only for IE. Would that be correct? I am guessing from a browser laggard perspective the only older browsers people would care about would be IE in general?
Sorry for all the novice questions, by day I normally do non ui data crunching like engineering :-}
Best
C
On Dec 5, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Peter Stavrinides wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
>
>> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
> If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its not just gradients.
>
>
>> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
> Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need for detection.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Chris Collins" <ch...@me.com>
> To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
> Subject: smarter css
>
> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
>
> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
>
> So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
>
> Random thoughts:
>
> - You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
> - Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
>
> Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
>
> again sorry for dumb questions.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: smarter css
Posted by Peter Stavrinides <P....@albourne.com>.
Hi Chris,
> So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly?
If you really want an answer to that, unfortunately yes... and no its not just gradients.
> So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
Browser detection is pretty awful, as its a moving target and not perfectly accurate, but granted in some cases a necessary evil... avoid it if you can. Its not uncommon to simply specify all the styles for the various browsers because those that are not understood will simply be ignored... be sure though that they are not understood or you might encounter a nasty surprise or two. In your example there should be no need for detection.
Cheers,
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Collins" <ch...@me.com>
To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, 6 December, 2011 7:48:57 AM
Subject: smarter css
So when it comes to css3 is it really so ugly? Ok perhaps its just things like gradients:
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/cssgradientbackgroundmaker/default.html
So in the microsoft example above for getting a gradient background you have to use different css properties per browser. So say I was trying to add browser specific css to my layout component what would people suggest as the best strategy?
Random thoughts:
- You can't tml-ify css, if you could then you could condition parts of it by browser right?
- Would you create a series of browser specific css assets then build inject them directly into the layout page?
Clearly I don't have a clue :-}
again sorry for dumb questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org