[Neos] [Poll] Naming conventions on CSS class names

[Thomas Allmer]

On 09.10.2013 8:09, Sebastian Kurfürst wrote:
 > thanks for the discussion!
:) thx for asking :)

 > However, I feel that using stuff like "div.htmlAttributes.class" would
 > be a too-unpragmatic solution currently -- people would expect e.g.
 > "div.htmlAttributes.id" to work as well, which it wouldn't.

implementing this would be pretty easy... but I'm not sure if this even 
a good path... I mean it sort of feels like a direction where everything 
will be in TypoScript and the fluidtemplate will become "empty" like 
<{tag} class="{classes}" id="{id}".... or even "worse" <f:tagBuilder 
options="{options}"> yeah it's probably flexible but you can not tell 
anything from the fluidtemplate anymore...

I mean what if you need certain default css classes by default? should 
they be in the typoscript and you can "add" stuff to a string?
=> one more step to "everything is in ts"


Maybe it would be best to just point out what it is... it's "just" a 
convention howto "store" html Attributes that MAY be used by the 
template... no magic by Default.... if certain fluidtemplates want to 
use some magic fine, but I'm not sure if it's good to encourage this...?
=> feels a little like the trap where the default content elements are 
so powerful and with so much magic people will not replace them even if 
they should... I mean how many of us have use the TYPO3 CMS "Text with 
Image" Element for stuff it was not originally intended :p


I'm more and more for what Aske was saying...
"I wouldn't want it too be so flexible, but rather encourage users to 
use their own templates if they need more custom stuff."


Anyway I'm not sure what's best... I still think 
"div.htmlAttributes.class" is better then "className" if you want some 
sort of ts for all/most/some default content Elements... for the default 
content elements the less magic the better...

just my 2 cents


 > That's why I decided on "className" now (also as result of the doodle
 > poll) -- we can lateron always use something like the above convention
 > and deprecate "className", providing even some migration.

true true,
I mean it's "just" a convention after all... and as it's so easy and 
encouraged to use your own templates for the content elements everyone 
can just do it like they prefer :)

-- 
thomas allmer für moodley
mail: thomas.allmer at moodley.at
telefon: +43 (0) 1 581 08 75
www.moodley.at
moodley brand identity gmbh
belvederegasse 26, A-1040 wien
fn 275953 p, atu 62465914