One more thing that might help clear up any confusion...
Some of the CSS class names were not the best choices (hindsight is
20-20). A more accurate name for the button-bar class would be
link-group (or control-group), and then the button-style classes could
be named group-style-1 and group-style-2. I'm not suggesting that we
change the names, I'm just saying if the class names had been different
there might be less confusion over what the classes are used for.
I was the author of those classes, so I'm pointing the finger at myself.
Giving things meaningful names has always been an enigma for me.
-Adrian
On 1/29/2011 8:34 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
I'm sure we discussed this just a few weeks ago, but I will go over it
again...
The button-style-1 and button-style-2 CSS classes are button-bar
class decorators. The button-bar class has other decorators too -
tab-bar and tool-bar. Altogether, there are four button-bar
decorators. The button-bar decorators were not intended to be used
alone to style links, but they have been used that way recently and I
have been fixing those instances as I come across them.
Setting up the CSS classes this way gives the graphic artist some
flexibility in styling the buttons. Attributes that all button bars
have in common (spacing, positioning, orientation) can be applied to
the button-bar class, and then the various decorators can have
attributes that make them unique.
It is up to the application developer to decide what the various
button-bar decorators represent. The decorators have no inherent
purpose - they simply provide the developer with some choices. In the
original visual theme, the tab-bar decorator was used for the sub-menu
at the top of the main content area, button-style-1 was used for
intra-app links, and button-style-2 was used for inter-app links.
I see no reason to remove any of the button-bar decorators. The
decorators give the developer and graphic artist a palette of choices.
That same concept gives us a choice of table header styles, table grid
styles, etc.
If there is an interest in removing unnecessary styles, then (in my
opinion) that effort should be invested in removing the deprecated CSS
styles. You can find them listed at the bottom of the Flat Grey
maincss.css file. Removing the box* styles would be a good place to
start.
-Adrian
On 1/29/2011 6:46 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
Hi,
again on this topic.
I have seen that in the new Flat grey theme the button-style-1 and
button-style-2 are rendered in the same way.
I agree on this and was going to do the same on the Tomahawk theme.
While doing this I asked myself if it does make sense to keep those two
styles.
They seems to be intended to be used to differentiate between
intra-app and
inter-app links.
But why an user should be aware of the matter that a link is an
intra-app or
inter-app ?
Shouldn't it be completely transparent to him?
I think that keeping these styles is only confusing and I would like to
remove it.
Moreover we should go toward style names that describe element
functions and
not their apparence.
For example the "create", "delete", "search", "refresh" button styles
have
not been defined as "button-with-plus", "button-with-cross",
"button-with-maglens" etc.
The new Demo page layout is a great tool to test themes.
It could also work as a "style dictionary" having all allowed styles
present
on the page and specifiyng that only styles present in this page
should be
used in the rest of the code.
Does anybody see any issue if we get rid of the button-style-1 and
button-style-2 styles?
Thank you,
Bruno
