Style Changer ... was .... Re: [thesite] test.evolt.org change fyi

Michele Foster michele at wordpro.on.ca
Fri Nov 16 11:20:42 CST 2001


Let's start with a new subject line .... ;)

Adrian,

I think you are (a) confused or (b) misinformed .. in a good way of course.
Let me explain.


----- Original Message -----
From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>

|
| not to mention we've been down this road... remember, i had
| originally tried to keep that consistency in design, regardless of
| colors, by creating hard-coded relationships between classes so
| the style changer couldn't override them...
|
| but that's not how it got built... (yes, i'm still in disagreement on
| how it got implemented)
|
| given that it's been built the way it is, we need to just leave it up to
| the user to do whatever he/she wants...


First of all, there is NO style changer currently built that is in use ..
not the way you are referring to one anyway.

Background:  Several months ago, we knew we were getting "low" on new style
schemes for new evolt projects.  So, a call went out to those members on
thesite to create some new colour schemes.  The files were available as a
download (you might remember I gave the wrong files at first).  No
guidelines or anything were given .. it was just, go for it .. play with
colour, have fun .. create something.

Old info ... not of real importance.

However, now what we've got is .... Dan and Jeff have added an "Edit
Membership" link to t.e.o.  The only thing there at the moment is choosing a
different style.  All of those CSS files are static .. they were randomly
chosen from the ones that were created during the "let's have fun with
colour" exercise above.  They were never verified, nor "approved" to meet
the requirements for evolt's CMS.

There is no random style changer.  There isn't anything in place that,
programmatically, could show the editors of the CSS files what should be the
same colour, font or whatever within the various classes.

Now, I think when the exercise was first introduced, more background should
have been given.  People should have been informed how to work with the CSS
files, how to maintain the original consistency, what exactly all those
"comments" meant, etc.  I'm only now, digging deeper, understanding exactly
what it is you meant with those comments in the files and how each piece
impacts another.

So, I think we are in a situation now where we can say "to heck with the
original intent" .. or we can say, "let's clean up the proposed CSS files
for use, and make sure they keep the original intent" as you've commented in
your CSS files.

THEN .. if and when a real programmable CSS style changer is built, we can
continue on with the hard work and careful consideration you've already
given to maintaining consistency within the CSS's used for evolt.

So, what say you ... should we go ad hoc now and allow anything and
everything .. or is it much better to clean up the proposed CSS files and
make sure that your original intent is still maintained?

Keep in mind .. the authors of the CSS files will be given the opportunity
to say "yes, I still want my name associated with that CSS scheme", or "no,
it changed too much from what I had in mind, please remove my name".

Thanks,

Michele






More information about the thesite mailing list