[thesite] Additions to default CSS file

[aardvark]

> From: ".jeff" <jeff at members.evolt.org>
> 
> well, with the exception of the <a> tags that sit within pagetitle1
> and pagetitle2, pretty much every <a> *is* already classed.

hmmm, just looked, and you're right... everything not in the content 
area is classed... i know why we (i) did it, but it seems so 
inelegant... anyway...

> actually, we're treating every block of <a> tags as a group of
> elements to be classed.  really all we're concerned with is if the
> background of the element where the <a> sits can have its color set
> *and* that containing element is not the content cell, then we need to
> consider permitting that <a> tag color be set separately.

yeah, i've got that, and i see the value of it...

> right now we've already got the links in the sidebar taken care of. 
> we've got the links above the tab taken care of.  the links in the
> main content area are taken care of.  the only ones remaining are the
> links in cells using pagetitle1 and pagetitle2 classes.

which i guess means they were the last hold-outs...

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > > yes, but i think you're answer dodges the current
> > > situation.  in other words, how are we supposed to
> > > make evoltoldschool.css work with the existing site
> > > while still maintaining the old v1.0 look and feel?
> >
> > we don't... it doesn't have to be a 1:1 re-creation...
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> 
> you say we don't.  i feel exactly the opposite.  to me, the blue bar
> across the top is a key piece of the look and feel.

except now we've got a black bar which is moreso a key piece of 
look and feel... yes, the stripe certainly has value, and i see why 
you want to do it...

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > > i've offered my solution to the problem.  i'd like to
> > > hear yours.
> >
> > thing is, i don't see a problem...
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> 
> what do you call those links disappearing when i view the site with
> evoltoldschool.css?  that's a problem.  whether the solution involves
> the suggestions i made or not, we need to fix it somehow.  would you
> prefer to alter the stylesheet instead?

i would prefer to alter the stylesheet... i would prefer that style 
creators not make those errors, and i would prefer that people who 
create custom styles figure out not to do that...

however, i don't have the time right now, and with all of your points, 
i really don't care so much now...

reasons i am resisting, though:

- too many things to change/adjust when creating styles... very 
intimidating to do and track...

- adding more classes, regardless of what else is there...

- updating all CSS files (seee below)...

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > i just don't think a 1:1 re-creation of one design or
> > complete customization is good enough reason to start
> > bloating code with embedded pseudo-style...
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> 
> easy with the exaggerative phrases.  98% of the cases where this could
> be a problem are already taken care of.  addressing 2 more will *not*
> bloat the code.

heh, we have different definitions... adding two, IMO, is bloat... and 
it also sets a precedent (which if you do this i'd like to avoid 
setting) that whenever something doesn't look right, instead of 
adjusting the CSS, we add more HTML...

this also means with every addition of classes, we have to (or at 
least damn well should) go back and update *every* CSS file out 
there that links to the site...

and *that* is a task i find way too daunting to be interested in...

i'm hoping you at least see my concern there....

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > this all goes back to my preference to see a more
> > restrictive scheme of allowing customization if we feel
> > our users are too dim to notice they're not seeing some
> > links anymore after they make their own...
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> 
> i fail to see how you'd restrict the user in setting the color for
> pagetitle1 and pagetitle2 cells such that links won't disappear in
> there because of common color usage.

no, take it waaaay back... i had the idea of *not* allowing every 
element to be adjusted, that there were relationships between 
them... so, for instance, the color you chose for the right sidebar 
would be used for pagetitle1's bg and the text of pagetitle2 (or 
whatever, this is from memory)...

this way could avoid having that happen, and if it did, the user 
would see it immediately, instead of after adjusting 40+ unique 
styles (is it more?)...

but again, that idea was summarily gutted when the style changer 
was built, so i let it go...

independently of that, since i think we can't guarantee CSS authors 
or users won't make those errors, go for it, class away...

just don't say i didn't try to take my ball and go home...

er...