what I would like to see is something that tells me the specificity of a certain style rule.. that would defenetly speed up development in larger more css-complex sites..
on specificity:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/cascade.html#specificity
http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archi ... _wars.html
css specificity
Moderator: kfury77
Forum rules
Please follow these guidelines when posting feature requests. This will help to increase the value of your contribution.
Please follow these guidelines when posting feature requests. This will help to increase the value of your contribution.
- Do not create new topics for already requested features. Add your comments to the existing feature request topics instead;
- Create separate topic for each feature suggestion. Do NOT post a number of non-related feature suggestions in a single topic;
- Give your topic a meaningful title. Do NOT create topics with meaningless titles, such as "My Suggestion" or "My Problem".
-
multifarious
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:40 pm
- Location: Amsterdam
- Contact:
css specificity
Patrick Kanne - webmaniac
- as we fail to imagine, we are punished with reality
- as we fail to imagine, we are punished with reality
-
multifarious
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:40 pm
- Location: Amsterdam
- Contact:
some thoughts
just a small note as addition (and probably getting into a slippery debate 
):
As with the JSON request I'd understand this wouldn't be on the top-of-your-list BUT.... these are exactly the kindof advanced things I'd expect from an all-round, dedicated webdevelopment tool. The notion that WeBuilder is such a dedicated tool is what makes me want to use it over more generalised text editors or IDE's like ultra-edit or eclipse. Even with a whole slew of plugins the latter of those just can't beat WB in the dedicated webdevelopment area.
What DOES annoy me currently (although just slightly) is that WB lets me down once things start to get really advanced (JSON, css-specifity, SVN/resource management) and I'm forced to go back to really dedicated tools (like TopStyle, tortoise etc).
Don't get me wrong: I love WeBuilder and I've been into more then one lengthy argument with my current employer, ferociously defending my need to use WeBuilder over Eclipse (mostly java-backend work in here) and will keep doing so untill the eclipse web-plugin working group gets things right (which they'll probably never will..). Just So You People Know 
...
Where was I going with this.. umm.. oh, yeah, I hope that you guys can take the above/the following in consideration when deciding on features, ie; supporting really advanced and maybe even obscure functionality might well be the thing that helps WB with blowing the competition out of the water
(that is: next to the notion you people really seem to listen to your users: kudos on that too .)
):As with the JSON request I'd understand this wouldn't be on the top-of-your-list BUT.... these are exactly the kindof advanced things I'd expect from an all-round, dedicated webdevelopment tool. The notion that WeBuilder is such a dedicated tool is what makes me want to use it over more generalised text editors or IDE's like ultra-edit or eclipse. Even with a whole slew of plugins the latter of those just can't beat WB in the dedicated webdevelopment area.
What DOES annoy me currently (although just slightly) is that WB lets me down once things start to get really advanced (JSON, css-specifity, SVN/resource management) and I'm forced to go back to really dedicated tools (like TopStyle, tortoise etc).
Don't get me wrong: I love WeBuilder and I've been into more then one lengthy argument with my current employer, ferociously defending my need to use WeBuilder over Eclipse (mostly java-backend work in here) and will keep doing so untill the eclipse web-plugin working group gets things right (which they'll probably never will..
). Just So You People Know ... Where was I going with this.. umm.. oh, yeah, I hope that you guys can take the above/the following in consideration when deciding on features, ie; supporting really advanced and maybe even obscure functionality might well be the thing that helps WB with blowing the competition out of the water
(that is: next to the notion you people really seem to listen to your users: kudos on that too .
)Patrick Kanne - webmaniac
- as we fail to imagine, we are punished with reality
- as we fail to imagine, we are punished with reality
Thank you for your feedback!
I think we won't be able to add this idea in nearest time, but if anybody else really needs this feature, please cast your votes here.
Also when we were developing css formatter, we had idea to have an option to sort the rules according to their specificity, but abandoned it because we thought not many would use it.
I think we won't be able to add this idea in nearest time, but if anybody else really needs this feature, please cast your votes here.
Also when we were developing css formatter, we had idea to have an option to sort the rules according to their specificity, but abandoned it because we thought not many would use it.
-
syrupcore
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 917
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:58 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon, usa
- Contact:
I don't really even understand what the program would do. Tell you the numerical weight of a given selector?
If so, I don't think I'd use it much but to each their own. Mostly seems intuitive to me. If not, the browser is sure to tell me when it renders incorrectly. The firebug tells you what's winning.
If so, I don't think I'd use it much but to each their own. Mostly seems intuitive to me. If not, the browser is sure to tell me when it renders incorrectly. The firebug tells you what's winning.
CSSEdit does a pretty good job.
http://macrabbit.com/cssedit/
Looks like the tool you want is:
http://culturedcode.com/xyle/
I would love to see a tool as good as CSSEdit for windows. OS X ftw
http://macrabbit.com/cssedit/
Looks like the tool you want is:
http://culturedcode.com/xyle/
I would love to see a tool as good as CSSEdit for windows. OS X ftw
-
syrupcore
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 917
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:58 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon, usa
- Contact:
I'm still kinda missing it. Doesn't firebug do most of that already?
When you inspect an element, the right pane shows you which styles are applied in reverse order of specificity. It even shows you when a particular line from another declaration is being overridden by greying it out and putting a red strike through circle next to it.
It's free, it's awesome. Why not use that (and the other 100 things firebug does so well) and let the blumentals team continue to innovate things that don't already exist?
When you inspect an element, the right pane shows you which styles are applied in reverse order of specificity. It even shows you when a particular line from another declaration is being overridden by greying it out and putting a red strike through circle next to it.
It's free, it's awesome. Why not use that (and the other 100 things firebug does so well) and let the blumentals team continue to innovate things that don't already exist?
-
chrisjlocke
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 995
- Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Essex, UK
- Contact:
-
multifarious
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:40 pm
- Location: Amsterdam
- Contact:
agreed that the firebug and webdeveloper toolbar provide us with a lot of VERY usefull stuff. anyone arguing against that is an idot.
BUT, following this line of reasoning, why should the wb team bother with a lot of stuff in the fiirst place? since there's enough out there that allready covers what WB has to offer and more? why an FTP client? why a PHP debugger? why a dom-tree browser? why a file-explorer in the first place? etc etc etc.
I just thought the whole idea behind and INTEGREATED development environment is that it, well, integrates stuff? If you don't need it, well, kudos to you (or: you will in due time).
I don't really i[need]i any of the stuff WB (or any other IDE for that matter) has to offer. But I do like how it speeds up my development and how it all fits within one interface, no need for constant alt-tabbing between your text-editor, help-files, resource files etc...
I noticed this past year that a lot of my work started to focus on real advanced and intricate CSS. Being able to see specificity-issues before they arise in the browser (where, BTW, I still have to look for them/notice them in time) would be a bonus plus. Hence me asking.
TBH at this moment I'd gladly swap out the markup browser for a more advanced css-browser thingy.. I mean, everybody knows HTML by now right? RIGHT? so lets just boot the useless thing..
[/rant]
BUT, following this line of reasoning, why should the wb team bother with a lot of stuff in the fiirst place? since there's enough out there that allready covers what WB has to offer and more? why an FTP client? why a PHP debugger? why a dom-tree browser? why a file-explorer in the first place? etc etc etc.
I just thought the whole idea behind and INTEGREATED development environment is that it, well, integrates stuff? If you don't need it, well, kudos to you (or: you will in due time).
I don't really i[need]i any of the stuff WB (or any other IDE for that matter) has to offer. But I do like how it speeds up my development and how it all fits within one interface, no need for constant alt-tabbing between your text-editor, help-files, resource files etc...
I noticed this past year that a lot of my work started to focus on real advanced and intricate CSS. Being able to see specificity-issues before they arise in the browser (where, BTW, I still have to look for them/notice them in time) would be a bonus plus. Hence me asking.
TBH at this moment I'd gladly swap out the markup browser for a more advanced css-browser thingy.. I mean, everybody knows HTML by now right? RIGHT? so lets just boot the useless thing..
[/rant]
Patrick Kanne - webmaniac
- as we fail to imagine, we are punished with reality
- as we fail to imagine, we are punished with reality
-
syrupcore
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 917
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:58 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon, usa
- Contact:
Multifarious,
The main difference is since we're developing websites, we spend lots of time in the browser already - by the very nature of what we do. This is different than say, Filezilla where it's only purpose in our workflow is as a utility. You know what I'm saying - no matter how you slice it, the web browser is going to be (or it should be!) open anyway. That seems like a reasonable place to pick up and use additional tools.
PHP debugger? Well, FF doesn't have a great one already. DOM tree, I use FF. ;)
I totally hear what you're saying though - an IDE is an IDE! There are a lot of feature ideas floating around out there and some of them have what I consider I high cost to value ratio. If there is already a great specificity explorer built into a tool we all use anyway, what's the value of that feature vs cost to develop it? What new features wont be developed while time is spent developing that? Please know, I don't just go around poopooing people's feature requests - we all request things for whatever reason. In this instance, Gatis asked for feedback from the community - so I shared. Also, I'm just one opinion. I think I've been handily outweighed in this thread! So be it.
FWIW, since you got a little sassy, no, I don't really need it. In due time, you wont either. ;)
Will
The main difference is since we're developing websites, we spend lots of time in the browser already - by the very nature of what we do. This is different than say, Filezilla where it's only purpose in our workflow is as a utility. You know what I'm saying - no matter how you slice it, the web browser is going to be (or it should be!) open anyway. That seems like a reasonable place to pick up and use additional tools.
PHP debugger? Well, FF doesn't have a great one already. DOM tree, I use FF. ;)
I totally hear what you're saying though - an IDE is an IDE! There are a lot of feature ideas floating around out there and some of them have what I consider I high cost to value ratio. If there is already a great specificity explorer built into a tool we all use anyway, what's the value of that feature vs cost to develop it? What new features wont be developed while time is spent developing that? Please know, I don't just go around poopooing people's feature requests - we all request things for whatever reason. In this instance, Gatis asked for feedback from the community - so I shared. Also, I'm just one opinion. I think I've been handily outweighed in this thread! So be it.
FWIW, since you got a little sassy, no, I don't really need it. In due time, you wont either. ;)
Will
-
multifarious
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:40 pm
- Location: Amsterdam
- Contact:
-
syrupcore
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 917
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:58 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon, usa
- Contact:
I've been known to get a little sassy myself. Chris'll tell you.
I should also note that I probably should not have assumed to know the cost-to-value bit. I don't write this software and perhaps the request is simple and fast. I would still wonder, even if it only took some one 4 hours to implement, if it could a) match firebug's ability and b) which of my absurdly numerous feature requests weren't being implemented because of it. Basically, I'm just greedy. ;p
Will
I should also note that I probably should not have assumed to know the cost-to-value bit. I don't write this software and perhaps the request is simple and fast. I would still wonder, even if it only took some one 4 hours to implement, if it could a) match firebug's ability and b) which of my absurdly numerous feature requests weren't being implemented because of it.
Basically, I'm just greedy. ;pWill