On 2/1/10 11:21 AM, "Chris Eppstein" <ch...@eppsteins.net> wrote:
> Yes, there is repetition in the generated css and with a small amount of risk
> it can be eliminated via an optimizer. But other than an extra 20 bytes in the
> css, what is the harm? I'm asking because I wonder if there's a use case that
> I'm not considering.
Well, Sass > CSS is as good as hand-coding/optimizing the CSS, but
repetition of same-specificity selectors seem to be as good as a server side
PHP include, in terms of output. Would prefer same specificity selectors to
be included together. But then again, debugging might be an issue, so I am
ambivalent.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Haml" group.
To post to this group, send email to h...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to haml+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.
