←back to thread

451 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
b_e_n_t_o_n ◴[] No.45060146[source]
I really do appreciate the nesting they've added but looking at it as a whole, CSS is a really strange and in my humble opinion, a terrible language. Perhaps I'm just holding it wrong, but it's just so complicated and messy, it sometimes feels like you're just arranging arcane runes in different ways until you make it sort of work for you. It's both a system for styling text based on inheritance, and a layout system for block and inline elements, nested recursively but without inheritance, only containment. I think it was a mistake to combine styling and layout, and I don't feel like adding more and more capabilities to something fundamentally broken can fix it.
replies(11): >>45060383 #>>45060483 #>>45060957 #>>45061557 #>>45061852 #>>45062092 #>>45062151 #>>45062384 #>>45063859 #>>45067840 #>>45069507 #
tmpfs ◴[] No.45062384[source]
I disagree, I think most of these opinions I see about CSS are from people that haven't taken the time to learn it and particularly to understand the cascade.

Many years ago I did a very deep dive into the CSS specs as I was researching for a new implementation and it struck me as well designed for its purpose of separating style from the semantics of markup.

replies(6): >>45062607 #>>45062813 #>>45067326 #>>45067564 #>>45067844 #>>45068108 #
bsenftner ◴[] No.45062607[source]
All that complexity is a trap. It creates a need for people that have spent the unreasonable time to grasp a poor design, and then they have the secrets that others simply do not have the time to waste learning yet another poorly designed reindeer game. That complexity eats time, energy and is pointless. CSS is a shit show of poor design, poor documentation, and secrets.
replies(2): >>45062704 #>>45062710 #
darkwater ◴[] No.45062704[source]
So, what is your proposal?
replies(1): >>45068896 #
mikestorrent ◴[] No.45068896{3}[source]
Throw away the front-end of the Web and start over with a system actually designed to facilitate graphical applications instead of delivering styled documents.

HTTP can stay, and HTML/CSS can stay just like PDFs for delivering a document, but when it comes to UI components, we should be able to have things as fast and performant as e.g. RedLang / Processing / Enlightenment DR17 / etc without every developer having to shovel megabytes of shim-ware down to the client.

replies(2): >>45069011 #>>45069040 #
peanut-walrus ◴[] No.45069040{4}[source]
We have a plethora of native frameworks for building UI-s. Some of them are quite well designed. And yet the Web front-end has won against all the UI frameworks designed specifically to build UI-s.
replies(1): >>45069476 #
1. Klonoar ◴[] No.45069476{5}[source]
That’s partly due to reach, though. The combination of the browser coupled with Electron eating away at those native UI layers means it unfortunately makes little sense to bother with alternatives, even if the alternatives are better.

I.e, the GP is trying to argue one thing and you’re kind of going down a different tangent.