Very nice and clear write up. I feel now I have a more clear understanding of where flexbox and grid specifications intermingle but also where they vary in a subtle but also very distinguished ways.
While I am no pro supporter of frameworks like bootstrap and can clearly see the comparing references made to the old-school table method, one argument overlooked in support of descriptive and re-usable class names is the fact that I can look at any website’s markup built on bootstrap never seeing the rendered result and KNOW what the layout looks like and how that content is presented visually. And not to say this couldn’t be done with the new css layout models (using repeatable descriptive class names) so I also have to agree that they are indeed more flexible than the frameworks…once fully adopted into unison compliance across all major browsers.
Philip Ingram
Very nice and clear write up. I feel now I have a more clear understanding of where flexbox and grid specifications intermingle but also where they vary in a subtle but also very distinguished ways.
While I am no pro supporter of frameworks like bootstrap and can clearly see the comparing references made to the old-school table method, one argument overlooked in support of descriptive and re-usable class names is the fact that I can look at any website’s markup built on bootstrap never seeing the rendered result and KNOW what the layout looks like and how that content is presented visually. And not to say this couldn’t be done with the new css layout models (using repeatable descriptive class names) so I also have to agree that they are indeed more flexible than the frameworks…once fully adopted into unison compliance across all major browsers.