Inline links not inline

@zacdavidm not so sure we should go crossing swords with foundation and drupal css.

Is there a particular problem you're running into, that you can share with us, that this will solve?

I haven't run into issues with this, but if the request has merit then I can make a patch for review.

It looks like there are core Drupal modules that implement .inline (for instance http://cgit.drupalcode.org/drupal/tree/modules/blog/blog.module?h=7.x#n92). I could see a case for implementing a custom class that inherits .inline-list properties so that out of the box the STARTER theme is a little more friendly to the default Drupal classes. However, I'd need someone else to confirm that thought.

The patch would possibly be to the STARTER/scss/base/_drupal.scss file. It might look like this:

.inline {
  @include inline-list;
}

Any thoughts?

@shauntyndall would it be better to add the class inline-list through template.php, like @zacdavidm suggests, as a preprocess since we already preprocess blocks? http://cgit.drupalcode.org/zurb-foundation/tree/template.php?h=7.x-5.x#n257

I can make the patch, but what are all of the elements it should apply to?

I just feel weird about adding exceptions for Drupal classes to the base css, especially when there's a foundation class to the same effect.

@filever10 it seems we don't really know where the .inline class is being used in Drupal (or where it could show up in the future). Preprocessing seems heavy-handed / complicated IMO. I thought base/_drupal.scss existed to handle these situations. That is why I thought having it inherit Foundation behavior would be the safest approach. I think @zacdavidm is favoring the inheritance solution as well (based on the way I'm reading the post).

@shauntyndall I see what you mean, and yeah that probably does make better sense.

Seems like it wouldn't create any havoc. Both classes are applied to ul elements, and it seems it would just put the Drupal class into the Foundation realm.

I made a patch with these changes, just need it to be reviewed to make sure there are no issues.

@FiLeVeR10 @zacdavidm i tested the patch against the blog module and it provided a better "out-of-the-box" experience. So, I committed it to the dev branch. Cheers!