Nice! And thanks Tim for the clarification, I'll definitely be incorporating that syntax in future projects.
Kevin On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:06 PM, John <j...@coffeeonmars.com> wrote: > > On Aug 25, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Kevin A. Cameron wrote: > > +1 for the OOCSS mentality...Start with a base class that defines the most >> common use, then use additional classes in conjunction with the base class >> to define the variations. >> > > this is working *very* well for me, both solving problems and giving me > flexibility at the same time. > > I re-named my styles improving their descriptiveness and with CamelCase, > the whole thing much easier to read and make sense of. > > > J > ______________________________**______________________________**__________ > css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] > http://www.css-discuss.org/**mailman/listinfo/css-d<http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d> > List wiki/FAQ -- > http://css-discuss.incutio.**com/<http://css-discuss.incutio.com/> > List policies -- > http://css-discuss.org/**policies.html<http://css-discuss.org/policies.html> > Supported by evolt.org -- > http://www.evolt.org/help_**support_evolt/<http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/> > ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
