Utility classes I dislike (mixins plx) and the idea of using important with them is not a design decision I would want to pick up.
I guess my bigger problem is that Harry sells himself as an expert, stands up on stage telling people this is how they should be doing things... and here I am, no book, no stage and my specificity level gets trumped by Harry amongst certain members of my team (despite my years of qualified awesomeness across large scale, popular, public domain sites)
I read that post earlier and it seemed fine. If you add a .bold class to an element, why would you want it to sometimes not be bold?
Utility classes don't belong everywhere but I think it's going a bit far to discredit the man for proposing this. His work on ITCSS in particular shows he's well versed in the language. I find this system far more sane than other proposals.
Why bother with class 'bold' when you could use inline styles? (I jest)
I come from an older thinking that your HTML should not have any classes that imply visual style, and that classes/id's should be semantic to the content and structure of the HTML.
CSSZen garden is a good example of this.
Nowadays I personally love semantic markup, stylistic mixins, and a CSS file linking the two together following BEM patterns.
I think legitimate times when this falls apart, is when I watch the designers I work with now, work in HTML & CSS - they need to quickly move things around, so doing this all from markup gives them a big speed increase, up until a point that is. We get involved now early after initial client direction sign-off to make their markup and CSS more robust before they carry on like a pig in poo.
> If you add a .bold class to an element, why would you want it to sometimes not be bold?
The problem is having a class called .bold, and then baking it into your HTML. I feel like many people arguing this have never undertaken a full-scale visual redesign on a large site. The designer comes in, and all the sudden everything marked .bold ends up meaning "lightweight italicized text". This presentational/semantic cycle repeats every 6 years or so, but I'm not sure where it's heading.
It's not just apple, it is every company that dodges taxes. Making an example of apple is not fair - everyone should pay their taxes... who knows how the systems we have in place would actually work if people used it the way it is designed (instead of finding loopholes for their own benefit).
Which taxes is Apple dodging? I'm not sure you read the article carefully. The mayor wanted to pass a new tax, but the other council members voted his proposal down.
That's not Apple dodging taxes either; they were just caught in the crossfire of the tax war that's been happening in the EU. Ireland, the Netherlands, etc try to lure companies by competing on tax rates, which the rest of the EU doesn't like, so as in any cartel, they forbid member states from dropping them too low. Since Ireland's was found to be in infringement, the companies have to pay the difference.
Unfortunately I think the Judge does not understand the context here, users of whatsapp will simply use another messaging app - the role of a messaging app is not to store users conversations but relay them.
Any messaging app that actively stores conversations, and then turns them over to anyone when requested will simply not be used by the public (or if it is, it won't be for very long).
Engineers don't often get to chose the features they work on, or to what degree they get polished. If it amazed me, I would direct such amazement to the correct person :`D
your point is well taken. software engineers are often subject to the whims of PMs and execs, and aren't always able to pursue the level of excellence they (the engineers) might prefer.
What are you talking about? The Daily Mail is a terrible source of what they believe will sell to their audiences; news/tabloids is a business, and they certainly do not care about the quality of their product, but only the income they generate - which, is worthwhile remembering before choosing to digest its dribble. I am not going to waste time demonstrating examples when anyone can simply visit the site and experience this for themselves.
Sure other 'news' sources are not immune, but at least step above appealing to the lowest common denominators in society or attempt to form some kind of quality.
I could provide analogies to help illustrate the point, but it is a waste of time arguing about it.
