Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 5.3

Overview

Fluid Project is evaluating CSS Frameworks as a possible tool:

  • for implementing project websites, and component demos
  • to integrate in components themselves to bring additional features

After a research and evaluation period (see: CSS Framework Research Notes), Foundation and Bootstrap have emerged to be the front runners. This attempts to document in detail the requirements of the framework to be used.

Findings

Recommendation

  • (error) Do not use a CSS framework for components (also see points below)
  • (tick) Recommend the use of CSS framework for websites, demos, and other integration situations
  • (tick) Foundation is the recommended CSS framework primarily because:
    • it uses REMs as units instead of PX.
    • a more usable grid system - it's fluid width and has a cleaner structure which makes integration and customization easier.
    • lighter weight.

CSS framework for components

...

Other interesting notes:

  • Common CSS framework features (such as navigation bars, link buttons, progress bars, breadcrumbs) can lead to some new Learner Preferences transformations. Also see "Possible new Learner Prefs transformations with CSS Framework" in the Criteria Evaluation table in the next section. 
    • It is conceivable that Learner Preferences need not adopt a CSS framework, but instead rely on the integrator to supply an adapter that links Learner Preferences to specific CSS classes. 
    • For example, Learner Prefs has a new feature which transforms navigation bars into vertical lists. The integrator writes an adapter that tells Learner Prefs which classes in their website correspond to navigation bars.

Criteria Evaluation

 

...

  • Bootstrap uses fixed width containers that "snap" across breakpoints
  • Grid layout needs to follow a container-row-column hierarchy. Otherwise 15px paddings / margins don't align properly.

...

  • Foundation uses fluid width containers that stretch and shrink depending on the size of the client, with relevant breakpoints.
  • Foundation has a row-column hierarchy with paddings on the columns only. Row is only for containment.

...

...

  • normalize.css is included in default package, but optional whether or not it is used in your markup.

...

Current release (v3) uses pixels and not EMs. However, v4 (unreleased) will support EMs. See Mark Otto's January 9th response in this thread on Github.

  • Note: EMs will be supported. Unclear if REMs will be used.
  • UIO works well with Bootstrap's pixel units, although EMs are more desirable.

...

  • REMs are desirable and easier to use for CSS styling than EM because REMs always refer to the root EM and not the parent EM as with EM units.
  • REM units currently do not scale properly in UI Options. See
    Jira
    serverFluid Project Issue Tracker
    keyFLUID-4698

...

  • +/-15px margin and padding on container, rows, and columns dictate a hierarchy and usage pattern. Customizing this or deviating from this pattern causes unintentional and unwanted alignment issues which can be hard to correct (involves overriding).
  • This hierarchy is required to ensure good scalable layouts.

...

  • Working with Foundation within a heavily customized application seemed very straight forward. Some styles needed to be overridden, but that was expected.
  • Foundation button has !important for font weight

...

  • important used for print media styling, visibility of collapsing navbar, and visible and hidden elements.
  • no use of !important on html elements

...

  • Bootstrap uses generic classnames which may cause classname collisions.
  • A work-around is to use LESS or Sass to add a named container. See this as a possible solution: https://coderwall.com/p/uiwcow

...

UIO Theme generation

...

  • Themes can be created using the online tool but it is not a quick process and error prone: http://getbootstrap.com/customize/
  • Themes can also be created by modifying the variables.less file
  • There are a lot of variables to configure, experimentation will be needed to determine the effect of each variable and which variables should be modified for a theme.

...

  • Background colour can not be changed using the online customization tool: http://foundation.zurb.com/develop/download.html#customizeFoundation
  • Themes can be created by modifying the _settings.scss file
  • There are a lot of variables to configure, experimentation will be needed to determine the effect of each variable and which variables should be modified for a theme.

...

 

Issue: REM sizes may not look proper where the root element has existing font-size

Description:

It is possible that the document in which an Infusion component is being added to already have a root font-size specified. In which case any REM sizes used in the Infusion component will size itself relative to that existing root font-size. If the font-size is not an expected value, the Infusion component may not look as expected.

Example:

Bootstrap specifies font-size: 62.5% on the HTML element, and a font-size: 14px to the Body element. Adding an Infusion component (which is using Foundation) with a font-size: 1rem to this document would have the Infusion component appear smaller since 1rem is relative to the 62.5% font-size value on the HTML element.

Conclusion:

This issue would occur if using Foundation in a Infusion component. To avoid this problem, Infusion's use of CSS framework should have a name space.

Issue: Without proper name spacing, it is difficult to mix two frameworks

Description:

If the integrator wants to customize an Infusion component using their own framework, style collisions may be unavoidable due to the use of generic classnames (like "row") or conflicting styles on HTML level elements (like "h1"). Therefore if Infusion's uses a CSS framework, it should be properly name spaced to ensure it doesn't get in the way of an integrator's customizations.

Discussion:

Conclusion:

At this time, name spacing a CSS framework is not feasible. The common approach is to use a post processor (like Python) to add name space information, but this approach is fragile since new versions of the CSS framework may break the script.

 

Use Case Exploration

There are currently some unresolved user questions:

  • What if a Fluid component is using a particular framework in its implementation, what are the consequences for an integrator?
  • An integrator is using an existing framework, what happens if the Fluid component is using the same or different framework?
  • In the case of the same framework, the component may be using a custom build or custom framework styles (over-ridden in css file) - what happens in this framework-framework interaction?

To explore answers to these questions, the following 4 use cases are possible:

  1. Integrator is not using any framework but chooses to use our component.
  2. Integrator adopts and uses the framework used by our component.
  3. Integrator is using the same framework as our component, but with different customizations (essentially two versions of the same framework exists on the same page).
  4. Integrator is using a different framework than the one used by our component.

To attempt to figure out the consequences of use cases 3 and 4, a custom version of Foundation (linked below) was created that is scoped to a mock Infusion component with the classname ".inf-foundation" on the container. 

  • Customized Foundation: Namespaced to .inf-foundation, headings pink: app-pink.css (customized Foundation with pink header text colour)
  • Customized Foundation: Namespaced to .inf-foundation, headings blue: app-blue.css (customized Foundation with blue header text colour)

 

Summary and Background

Up to version 1.5, Infusion shipped with a built-in CSS framework called the Fluid Skinning System. When the FSS was first designed, there were few viable production-scale CSS frameworks available to developers. As a community, we felt a need to provide something that had been designed with accessibility and flexibility in mind. Since then, we've experienced a massive shift in the way websites are designed and implemented. Responsive Web Design is now widely practiced, enabling web pages to adapt to different screen sizes and device form factors. CSS preprocessors such as Less and Sass have changed the way style sheets are developed and reused. Mature and widely-used CSS frameworks such as Bootstrap and Foundation are available to help ease the effort of styling responsive layouts, grids, and widgets.

Unfortunately, the Fluid Skinning System hasn't kept pace. As a result, we chose to deprecate it in version 1.5. We recommend that users of Infusion choose from any of the available third-party frameworks based on their own needs and requirements. As of Infusion 2.0, we will remove FSS entirely.

Infusion components currently don't rely on any CSS framework, and we will continue to ensure that they are styled in a way that is unlikely to conflict with popular tools like Bootstrap and Foundation. For the foreseeable future, we don't plan to include any third-party CSS framework with Infusion, nor to require that our users select a specific framework.

Who is this document for?

This document reflects the decision-making process we have undertaken as a community to select a CSS framework for some of our own websites, documentation, and demos. It may also be useful when selecting your own CSS framework to use alongside Infusion.

Recommendation Summary

Fluid Infusion components do not use a CSS framework out of the box. The motivation for this is to ensure Infusion components play nicely in whatever application is used. Integrators may choose to add their own CSS framework to Infusion components if they wish.

Using a CSS Framework within an Infusion component

  • Components shipped as part of the core Infusion package do not use a CSS framework for their styling.
     
  • Some CSS frameworks don't use namespaced or prefixed class names, which creates the possibility of collisions that can cause styling problems. Infusion component styles are always namespaced, which reduces the potential for Infusion to cause conflicts with non-namespaced frameworks. See Infusion Class Name Conventions for more information.
  • Because Infusion components do not use a CSS framework by default, component creators will need to create good default styles and leave it to the integrator to customize with their own CSS framework if they choose to.

Using a CSS Framework within Fluid-related demos, websites, etc.

  • A CSS framework is fine to be used for websites, demos, and other integration / non-component scenarios. We recommend Foundation because of its use of REM sizing throughout.

Using a CSS Framework for contrast themes in UI Options and the Preferences Framework

  • At this time it is difficult to create contrast themes for CSS frameworks despite the availability of custom builders. Custom builders may not be an appropriate tool as they do not cover all possible styling rules we want to affect.
  • Creating a theme manually is non-trivial (lots of values to adapt)
  • Themes would have to be tested with each major and minor framework release to ensure compatibility. This adds a maintenance burden.

Future possibilities

  • There may be an opportunity to add new features to Learner Preferences that can transform CSS framework components (like navigation bars and button links). Further discussion is encouraged.
  • Contrast theme generation using a CSS pre-processor to be investigated. Possible pre-processors include: Less, SASS, and Stylus. This will be a separate discussion.

Appropriate Use of a CSS Framework

Example: Metadata component

Choosing a CSS Framework: Why Zurb Foundation?

In deciding which framework to recommend for the Fluid project, many criteria were considered including: documentation, community support, accessibility, and scalability.

After researching and comparing 6 different CSS frameworks, Zurb Foundation is the recommended framework for the following reasons:

  • Foundation uses REMs as units which ensures scalability across clients and devices.
  • Foundation's grid system is flexible - it's fluid width and has a cleaner structure which makes integration and customization easier.
  • We typically work in highly customized environments and Foundation is light weight and doesn't get in the way (mostly).

Can I use a different framework?

Yes, you can use any framework you prefer. For Fluid-related websites and demos, we prefer frameworks that are:

  • Accessible and scalable
  • Mature and widely supported
  • Open source

Future Considerations

Better namespacing

  • At this time it is very difficult to namespace CSS framework classes. Most solutions are a manual process, or a manual process that is automated by a script. This is fragile and requires constant testing with each new framework release.
  • If a CSS framework or tool emerges to support custom name spacing easily, and satisfies our needs (i.e. scalable, accessible, widely supported, etc.) - we should revisit the topic of using a framework for Infusion components.

Add CSS framework support to the Preferences Framework

  • Since CSS frameworks share common features (such as navigation bars, link buttons, progress bars, breadcrumbs), this can lead to some new preferences.
  • For example:
    • Linearize / stack content by changing the grid layout
    • Navigation bar preferences: make tabs look like pills, make navigation pills stack
    • Pager: size, appearance, spacing
    • Alerts: change the way alerts are positioned or styled (i.e. make them bigger, put them in a floating panel etc.)

...

  • Like Bootstrap, Foundation features can be turned into Learner Preferences
  • For example:
    • Linearize / stack content by changing grid layout
    • Reposition side navigation
    • Turn sub-nav (frequently used for filtering lists) from horizontal list into a drop-down menu.
    • Change the way link-buttons (links that look like buttons) appear
    • Make progress bars bigger and appear in different colours.
  • In order to support multiple CSS frameworks, consider using an adapter model where the Preferences framework supports a generic definition and adapters are created to map CSS framework definitions to the framework. i.e. Framework 1 may use divs for breadcrumbs, and Framework 2 may use a list. The adapter would define this configuration so that the framework can use both.

 

 

Table of Contents

Table of Contents
excludeTable of Contents