Not exactly a system nor a framework, but I start all of my side projects using
1 Like
I have a very strong dislike of utility classes, like I cannot even begin to understand the value of a utility class. It’s so disorganised - I like my text & semantic structure in one file, and my design in a second file as far as possible. I use mostly classless CSS, and rely on selectors.
I also try and keep three separate CSS files for each page: one for structure, one for style, and then a link to the fonts.css page for my whole site. Structure might be ‘a responsive column with sidebar’ and style ‘make it look vaporwave’
I’ve never found a use for grid - I am ok at flexbox and that does everything I need it to. I’ve got a history of thinking something is a use for grid, coding 80% of the way and realising flexbox does it better.
I try and avoid media queries. I like the webpage to do its own calculating, something I picked up from Every Layout. It’s trickier but more satisfying.
I have a folder of my favourite code snippets which I drop into lots of projects, like setting up pretty quotation marks, fancy drop caps, and my favourite font sizes, so I don’t reinvent the wheel; it’s like, over time, my own design system
3 Likes
mininal css with tables for layout. in theory fully html4 compatible
1 Like
Hell, that would probably work with HTML 3.2, nevermind HTML4.
1 Like
I think that HTML4 (sometimes even 3.2) and style standards of the end of 2000 (this is the version for IE6) are enough for a page to reflect the essence, personality, information. Bells and whistles, frameworks and stupid modern crap do not reflect this.
1 Like
As someone who came from a graphic design background, I have been impressed by how much CSS has evolved since I dabbled into it for the first time in the 2000s, so I make use of many powerful modern CSS features such as Flexbox, grid, media queries, etc. to design my website to make it not only look good, but also responsive and meet web accessibility standards as much as possible.
My website’s layout is sort of based on the “Holy Grail” layout. Not every page has 3 columns, but my shrines’ pages and most of my articles and blog posts do. I actually did not even realise there is a term for this kind of layout when I began to implement it, haha.
5 Likes
i tried using grids in the past for masonry designs but found that i couldn’t quite grasp it, so i more or less stick to flexbox. i like that flexbox is so dependable and quick to use for my purposes, and also (for the most part) looks fine on other non-mobile resolutions. i do hope one day when i have more time to learn grids though, as finicky as it is.
in general i like to use whatever is easiest and looks best on my monitor, and that includes margin:auto and absolute positioning and whatever other ostensibly inelegant solutions i come up with that work out the box. i’m not too concerned about being modern or clean or even producing something that’s “good”, i only care about being able to create in a way that makes sense to me and is fun. hell, i still use the marquee tag even though it works like shit and there are other ways to achieve the same thing with less hassle because it’s serviceable enough and kind of funny.
3 Likes
I honestly don’t know what category it fits in, but for the things I’ve done more or less completely from scratch I’ve gone with making every column a percentage of the full width (with the maximum usually being 800-900px) unless the width is below a certain size, at which point every column takes up the entire page. It’s easy and responsive, but probably has some downside I’ve yet to encounter – especially if you were to make something with things in places that isn’t as easily definable as “next to this thing” lol
1 Like