Ok, so if we include layout CSS — IF! (see #864564: How much CSS?), then *which* kind of layout do we do?

Content first?
Grid framework?
???

CommentFileSizeAuthor
#15 bartik-864568-15.patch697 bytestim.plunkett

Comments

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented

So... my opinion. I think including a grid framework is too strong of a decision. Plus, how would we pick one, when different people like different ones. 960 or blueprint? 12-col or 16-col? Fluid or fixed? Yadi-yadi-ya.

Too much.

Let's *not* use a grid framework. And instead whatever layout we use, make it lightweight.

Perhaps the content-first technique in Zen and Basic is a good one. Easy to rip out and replace with a grid if you want. Starts out people with great accessibility-centered semantic markup.

theresaanna’s picture

theresaanna commented

+1 to jen's suggestions

theresaanna’s picture

theresaanna commented

Bah. Accidental dupe.

Pretend that I said something revolutionary here!

mason@thecodingdesigner.com’s picture

mason@thecodingdesigner.com commented

Definitely agree. No frameworks here. I'm starting to consider the idea of just drawing borders on our regions, to outline each section. This might be just enough to let themers know where sections begin and end, and not try to suggest anyone use any particular layout system.

perusio’s picture

perusio commented

Fortunately with panels everywhere there's no our way or the highway layout approach. Don't like the layout? Great build your own in minutes. Use whichever technique you want. Panels already brings a set layouts and we can provide a few more if necessary.

laura s’s picture

laura s commented

+1 to minimalist approach, leave the grids for subthemes and forks. I'd mark this reviewed but we have a pretty small quorum so far.

jacine’s picture

jacine
she/her
Location New York
commented

I also agree with the minimalist approach. We need to keep this laser focused, especially in the early stages.

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented
Status: Active » Reviewed & tested by the community

Yeah, the purpose of this theme is to be a great tool for themers! It's not a end-user tool. It's not a beginners tool. We are making an awesome html5 base theme for *us* to use :) Projects like Panels Everywhere have a totally different purpose, so we don't need to worry about what's up over there.

So it sounds like we have agreement. Do the most basic layout possible, knowing that everyone who uses the theme will most likely rip it out and replace it with something else. But also, including a layout so that it's not totally layout-less.

There's more to be figured out, especially once we actually have a list of regions and someone sits down to right code. Maybe we just use the layout from Zen, and the regions from D6. And keep it simple. That combo totally bores me as a designer [which is why Bartik is *very* different ;)], but I can't think of a better "generic" choice for us to share. It'll be very familiar to people who know the D6 theme system — which makes it easier to override.

perusio’s picture

perusio commented

What do you mean by:

Projects like Panels Everywhere have a totally different purpose, so we don't need to worry about what's up over there.

To be specific I was talking about supporting panels everywhere in HTML5 Base. For that a layout is necessary, corresponding to a set of files:

<layout_name>.inc
<layout -name>.tpl.php
<layout_name>.css
<layout_name>.png  // thumbnail to display in page manager layout menu

Whichever layout we're going to offer using the drupal block system it has to be offered also by the panels_everywhere option. The .info file needs to have the layout plugin referred to.

; Panels plugins.
plugins[panels][layouts] = plugins/layouts
plugins[panels][styles] = plugins/styles ; if we offer styles also besides layouts
jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented

perusio, I don't know what I am talking about.

Panels support in HTML Base sounds like a good idea. Can you tell us more about how that impacts the regular theme and it's layout? If it has too much of an impact, maybe we should do this in a subtheme.

In fact, let's open another issue to have this discussion — an issue about Panel's support. I opened one over here: #875066: Discuss support for Panels / Panels Everywhere. Perusio, can you summarize and explain what you mean on that issue?

Meanwhile, let's use this issue to talk about whether to have CSS to make a super simple layout (like Mothership, Zen, et al) or have *no* layout, like Mobile.

perusio’s picture

perusio commented

It has 0 negative impact. Only positive. We don't have to force someone using it. But making it available opens up the possibilities IMHO.

I propose a scheme like the following: HTML5 Base is the master theme. The panels everywhere support is a separate download: HTML Base PE it just replicates the layout and style of the master theme but for Panels Everywhere. Thanks for opening that issue.

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Needs work

Alright, so we came to an agreement about layouts.... anyone want to work on this css?

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented

I just dropped in the layout.css from Basic.

jensimmons’s picture

jensimmons commented
Title: Which kind of layouts » Basic layout css
Status: Needs work » Needs review

What do we think of where it's at now?

tim.plunkett’s picture

tim.plunkett
he/him
Primary language English
Location Philadelphia
commented
StatusFileSize
new bartik-864568-15.patch697 bytes

Missed one occurrence each of sidebar-left/sidebar-right.

I foresee one possible problem with using .center to denote #content-inner (as in .two-sidebars .center, .sidebar-first .center {margin-left: 190px;}. Assuming the themer is using semantic classnames, there will never be a problem. But I have seen lesser sites using .center as a way to centering an element.

Is .two-sidebars #content-inner, .sidebar-first #content-inner {margin-left: 190px;} bad form?

mason@thecodingdesigner.com’s picture

mason@thecodingdesigner.com commented

Tim you got there first. :) I noticed that two col layouts were breaking.

committed: http://drupal.org/cvs?commit=409208

I agree, tho, that using .center may not be ideal, but since most of our users will customize anyway I'm not too bothered. Maybe we'll revise once we're satisfied with the first draft.

travist’s picture

travist commented
Version: » 7.x-2.x-dev
Status: Needs review » Closed (duplicate)

Duplicate of #1036524: Use Stark layout css to get started