Den 05.03.2014 19:57, skrev Jens O. Meiert:
The “clearfix” hack is one of the worst hacks we’ve ever seen because
not only was it never (not as much) needed [1], not only did it
violate every naming best practice [2], but it also (well, poor naming
already implies that) guaranteed authors to touch all the templates
and documents again just for hack management.
[1] puts too many limitations on design, as elements get "clipped" over
the edge of containers with anything but 'overflow: visible' (default)
on them. Probably not much of a problem to most designers, but I have
found limited use for the 'overflow' property for anything but to
control overflow itself.
[2] good/bad naming aside, the "ClearFix" method doesn't acquire us to
do anything but to add a little CSS to control existing elements, and
update the old method a little if it doesn't fit right away.
Apart from that: using any CSS property/value for whatever it achieves,
is perfectly OK.
Checking what a property/value does outside "our" visual sphere, to make
sure we don't cause problems for any end-user, makes sense. But,
excluding any property/value that gets the job done, just because we, or
someone else, dislike something about it, does not make sense.
regards
Georg
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [[email protected]]
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/
