Purpose: Maintainability, Scalability, Ease of ramp up,
- CSS document anatomy
- Source order
- Anatomy of rulesets
- Naming conventions
- Comments
- Writing CSS
- Building new components
- OOCSS
- Layout
- Font sizing
- Shorthand
- IDs
- Selectors
- CSS selector intent
!important- Shame.css
- Magic numbers and absolutes
- Conditional stylesheets
- Debugging
- Credits
No matter the document, we must always try and keep a common formatting. This means consistent commenting, consistent syntax and consistent naming.
CSS should be written in Expanded Form:
.widget {
rule: value;
}
SCSS is our prefered CSS syntax.
Our files should be organized by modules. Much of this thinking was inspired by this article by Dale Sande: Clean out your Sass junk-drawer
all.scss
_config.scss
_reset.scss
_functions.scss
_shame.scss
_dev.scss
modules/
main-header/
_functions.scss
_mixins.scss
_module_mainHeader.scss
_module_mainNav.scss
main-footer/
_functions.scss
_mixins.scss
_module_mainFooter.scss
_module_footerNav.scss
buttons/
_functions.scss
_mixins.scss
_buttons.scss
layouts/
_landing.scss
_dashboard.scss
_blog.scss
fonts/
*font files here*
_fonts.scss
Some global SCSS files should appear in every project.
- reset.scss // level the browser playing field and start with a blank canvas
- fonts.scss // references your font files and set up font names
- dev.scss // contains any styling useful during development
- config.scss // set all site-wide variables and third-party overrides
- functions.scss // create reusable functions here to separate function from style
- shame.scss
This file should reference each included SCSS file with direct links to open the file in vim and a brief description:
// SIGN-UP
// app/sign-up.scss
// Define the styles for the embeddable sign up widget.
app/sign-up.scss
// MODAL
// app/modal.scss
// Define all global styles for modal windows
app/modal.scss
// etc...
All links must be relative to the current directory. This allows Vim users to simply place their cursor over the path and type 'gf' to open it.
Without being able to search for files, the table of contents wouldn't be nearly as useful. At the top of each SCSS file reference the name as you defined it in the table of contents.
We will also include several other pieces of helpful information: a) primary contributors (name/email), and editor settings.
// ex: set tabstop=8 expandtab:
//
//
// $RESET
//
//
// @author Your Name <you@youremail.com>
// @doc
// Any documentation needed goes here...
// @end
The $ prefixing the name of the section allows us to run a find
for $[SECTION-NAME] and limit our search scope to section titles only.
All stylesheets should be in order of specificity. This ensures that you take full advantage of inheritance and CSS' first C; the cascade.
A well ordered set of stylesheets will look something like this:
- Elements – unclassed
h1, unclasseduletc. - Objects and abstractions — generic, underlying design patterns.
- Components – full components constructed from objects and their extensions.
- Style trumps – error states etc.
This means that—as you go down the document—each section builds upon and inherits sensibly from the previous one(s). There should be less undoing of styles, less specificity problems and all-round better architected stylesheets.
[selector]{
[property]: [value];
}
- Use hyphen delimited class names (except for BEM notation, see below)
- Soft tabs with a 2 space indent
- 1 space after the colon
':'following the property - Multi-line
- Declarations in alphabetical order
- Indent vendor prefixed declarations so that their values are aligned
- Indent our rulesets to mirror the DOM
- Always include the final semi-colon in a ruleset
0values should not include the unit (px/em/etc)
A brief example:
.widget{
background-color: #c0ffee;
border: 1px solid #bada55;
-webkit-border-radius: 4px;
-moz-border-radius: 4px;
-ms-border-radius: 4px;
-o-border-radius: 4px;
border-radius: 4px;
padding: 10px;
}
.widget-heading{
color: #bada55;
font-size: 16px;
font-size: 1.5rem;
font-weight: bold;
line-height: 1;
margin-left: -10px;
margin-right: -10px;
padding: 0.25em;
}
Here we can see that .widget-heading must be a child of .widget as we have
indented the .widget-heading ruleset one level deeper than .widget. This is
useful information to developers that can now be gleaned just by a glance at the
indentation of our rulesets.
One exception to our multi-line rule might be in cases of the following:
.t10 { width:10% }
.t20 { width:20% }
.t25 { width:25% }
.t30 { width:30% }
.t33 { width:33.333% }
.t40 { width:40% }
.t50 { width:50% }
.t60 { width:60% }
.t66 { width:66.666% }
.t70 { width:70% }
.t75 { width:75% }
.t80 { width:80% }
.t90 { width:90% }
In this example (from inuit.css's table grid system it makes more sense to single-line our CSS.
Always use hyphen delimited classes (e.g. .foo-bar, not
.foo_bar or .fooBar), however in certain circumstances we can use BEM (Block,
Element, Modifier) notation.
BEM is a methodology for naming and classifying CSS selectors in a way to make them a lot more strict, transparent and informative.
The naming convention follows this pattern:
.block{}
.block__element{}
.block--modifier{}
.blockrepresents the higher level of an abstraction or component..block__elementrepresents a descendent of.blockthat helps form.blockas a whole..block--modifierrepresents a different state or version of.block.
An analogy of how BEM classes work might be:
.person{}
.person--woman{}
.person__hand{}
.person__hand--left{}
.person__hand--right{}
Here we can see that the basic object we’re describing is a person, and that a different type of person might be a woman. We can also see that people have hands; these are sub-parts of people, and there are different variations, like left and right.
We can now namespace our selectors based on their base objects and we can also
communicate what job the selector does; is it a sub-component (__) or a
variation (--)?
So, .page-wrapper is a standalone selector; it doesn’t form part of an
abstraction or a component and as such it named correctly. .widget-heading,
however, is related to a component; it is a child of the .widget construct
so we would rename this class .widget__heading.
BEM looks a little uglier, and is a lot more verbose, but it grants us a lot of power in that we can glean the functions and relationships of elements from their classes alone. Also, BEM syntax will typically compress (gzip) very well as compression favours/works well with repetition.
Regardless of whether you need to use BEM or not, always ensure classes are
sensibly named; keep them as short as possible but as long as necessary. Ensure
any objects or abstractions are very vaguely named (e.g. .ui-list, .media)
to allow for greater reuse. Extensions of objects should be much more explicitly
named (e.g. .user-avatar-link). Don't worry about the amount or length of
classes; gzip will compress well written code incredibly well.
In a bid to make things easier to read, separate classes is your HTML with two (2) spaces, thus:
<div class="foo--bar bar__baz">
This increased whitespace should allow for easier spotting and reading of multiple classes.
Use the is- prefix for state rules that are shared between CSS and JS.
<div class="foo--bar is-active">
Never use a CSS styling class as a JavaScript hook. Attaching JS behaviour to a styling class means that we can never have one without the other.
If you need to bind to some markup use a JS specific CSS class. This is simply a
class namespaced with .js-, e.g. .js-toggle, .js-drag-and-drop. This means
that we can attach both JS and CSS to classes in our markup but there will never
be any troublesome overlap.
<th class="js-search-results is-sortable">
</th>
The above markup holds two classes; one to which you can attach some styling for sortable table columns and another which allows you to add the sorting functionality.
Whether you grew up using colour instead of color—for
the sake of consistency, it is better to always use US-English in CSS. CSS, as
with most (if not all) other languages, is written in US-English, so to mix
syntax like color:red; with classes like .colour-picker{} lacks consistency.
When more than one or two lines are needed, use a docBlock-esque commenting style limited to 80 characters in length:
//
//
// This is a docBlock style comment
//
// This is a longer description of the comment, describing the code in more
// detail. We limit these lines to a maximum of 80 characters in length.
//
// We can have markup in the comments, and are encouraged to do so:
//
// <div class=foo>
// <p>Lorem</p>
// </div>
//
// We do not prefix lines of code with an asterisk as to do so would inhibit
// copy and paste.
//
//
Document and comment your code as much as you possibly can, what may seem or feel transparent and self explanatory to you may not be to another dev. Write a chunk of code then write about it.
There are a number of more advanced techniques you can employ with regards comments, namely:
- Quasi-qualified selectors
- Object/extension pointers
Never qualify your selectors; that is to say, never write
ul.nav{} if you can just use .nav. Qualifying selectors a) decreases selector
performance, b) inhibits the potential for reusing a class on a different type of
element and c) it increases the selector's specificity. These are all things that
should be avoided at all costs.
However, sometimes it is useful to communicate to the next developer(s) where
you intend a class to be used. Let’s take .product-page for example; this
class sounds as though it would be used on a high-level container, perhaps the
html or body element, but with .product-page alone it is impossible to
tell.
By quasi-qualifying this selector (i.e. commenting out the leading type selector) we can communicate where we wish to have this class applied, thus:
/*html*/.product-page{}
In SCSS you can simply put a line above.
// <html>
.product-page{}
We can now see exactly where to apply this class but with none of the specificity or non-reusability drawbacks.
Other examples might be:
// <ol>
.breadcrumb{}
// <p>
.intro{}
// <ul>
.image-thumbs{}
Here we can see where we intend each of these classes to be applied without impacting the specificity of the selectors.
When working in an object oriented manner you will often have two chunks of CSS (one being the skeleton (the object) and the other being the skin (the extension)) that are very closely related, but that live in very different places. In order to establish a concrete link between the object and its extension with use object/extension pointers. These are simply comments which work thus:
In a stylesheet called 'sidebar':
.error {
background-color: #fdd;
border: 1px solid #f00;
}
In your theme stylesheet:
//
// Extends `.error` in sidebar.scss
//
.serious-error {
@extend .error;
border-width: 3px;
}
Here we have established a concrete relationship between two very separate pieces of code.
The previous section dealt with how we structure and form our CSS; they were very quantifiable rules. The next section is a little more theoretical and deals with our attitude and approach.
When building a new component write markup before CSS. This means you can visually see which CSS properties are naturally inherited and thus avoid reapplying redundant styles.
By writing markup first you can focus on data, content and semantics and then apply only the relevant classes and CSS afterwards.
Work in an OOCSS manner; split components into structure (objects) and skin (extensions). As an analogy (note, not example) take the following:
.room{}
.room--kitchen{}
.room--bedroom{}
.room--bathroom{}
We have several types of room in a house, but they all share similar traits;
they all have floors, ceilings, walls and doors. We can share this information
in an abstracted .room{} class. However we have specific types of room that
are different from the others; a kitchen might have a tiled floor and a bedroom
might have carpets, a bathroom might not have a window but a bedroom most likely
will, each room likely has different coloured walls. OOCSS teaches us to
abstract the shared styles out into a base object and then extend this
information with more specific classes to add the unique treatment(s).
So, instead of building dozens of unique components, try and spot repeated design patterns across them all and abstract them out into reusable classes; build these skeletons as base ‘objects’ and then peg classes onto these to extend their styling for more unique circumstances.
If you have to build a new component split it into structure and skin; build the structure of the component using very generic classes so that we can reuse that construct and then use more specific classes to skin it up and add design treatments.
All components you build should be left totally free of widths; they should always remain fluid and their widths should be governed by a parent/grid system.
Rather than use a grid system that requires extra markup or an abundance of classes, we create our grid using custom mixins applied to various containers.
In grid.scss define columns and gutters as so:
//
// Base font size = 16px // Defined in base.scss
// Site = 1000px, Column = 150px, Gutter = 20px (6 column grid)
//
$column: 15%;
$gutter: 2%;
$onecol: $column;
$twocol: ($column * 2) + $gutter;
$threecol: ($column * 3) + ($gutter * 2);
$fourcol: ($column * 4) + ($gutter * 3);
$fivecol: ($column * 5) + ($gutter * 4);
$sixcol: ($column * 6) + ($gutter * 5);
Leave any notes above the grid in a comment block. For instance, a new dev may not know how the 1000px wide design file translates to a 15% column. When sizing in ems or rems it is also helpful to include the base font size here.
We can use a combination of methods for sizing UIs. Percentages, pixels, ems, rems and nothing at all.
Grid systems should, ideally, be set in percentages. Because we use grid systems to govern widths of columns and pages, you can leave components totally free of any dimensions (as discussed above).
Font sizes should be set in rems with a pixel fallback. This gives the accessibility benefits of ems with the confidence of pixels. Here is a handy Sass mixin to work out a rem and pixel fallback for you (assuming you set your base font size in a variable somewhere):
@mixin font-size($font-size){
font-size: $font-size +px;
font-size: $font-size / $base-font-size +rem;
}
Only use pixels for items whose dimensions were defined before the came into the site. This includes things like images and sprites whose dimensions are inherently set absolutely in pixels.
Rather than simply using .hN notation we use abstract classes made up of the first six letters of the Greek alphabet:
h1,.alpha {}
h2,.beta {}
h3,.gamma {}
h4,.delta {}
h5,.epsilon {}
h6,.zeta {}
This allows us to reuse the styles without always being locked into specific elements.
Shorthand CSS needs to be used with caution.
It might be tempting to use declarations like background:red; but in doing so
what you are actually saying is ‘I want no image to scroll, aligned top-left,
repeating X and Y, and a background colour of red’. Nine times out of ten this
won’t cause any issues but that one time it does is annoying enough to warrant
not using such shorthand. Instead use background-color:red;.
Similarly, declarations like margin:0; are nice and short, but
be explicit. If you actually only really want to affect the margin on
the bottom of an element then it is more appropriate to use margin-bottom:0;.
Be explicit in which properties you set and take care to not inadvertently unset
others with shorthand. E.g. if you only want to remove the bottom margin on an
element then there is no sense in setting all margins to zero with margin:0;.
Shorthand can be good, but is most often abused.
A quick note on IDs in CSS before we dive into selectors in general.
NEVER use IDs in CSS.
They can be used in your markup for JS and fragment identifiers but use only classes for styling. There shouldn't be a single ID in any stylesheets!
Classes come with the benefit of being reusable (even if we don't want to, we can) and they have a nice, low specificity. Specificity is one of the quickest ways to run into difficulties in projects and keeping it low at all times is imperative. An ID is 255 times more specific than a class, so never ever use them in CSS ever.
Keep selectors a) short, b) efficient and c) portable.
Heavily location-based selectors are bad for a number of reasons. For example,
take .sidebar h3 span{}. This selector is too location-based and thus we
cannot move that span outside of a h3 outside of .sidebar and maintain
styling.
Selectors which are too long also introduce performance issues; the more checks
in a selector (e.g. .sidebar h3 span has three checks, .content ul p a has
four), the more work the browser has to do.
Make sure styles are not dependent on location, and make sure selectors are nice and short.
Selectors as a whole should be kept short (e.g. one - two class(es) deep) but the class
names themselves should be as long as they need to be. A class of .user-avatar
is much easier to quickly read and comprehend than .usr-avt.
Remember: classes are neither semantic or insemantic; they are sensible or insensible! Stop stressing about ‘semantic’ class names and pick something sensible and futureproof.
As discussed above, qualified selectors are bad news.
An over-qualified selector is one like div.promo. You could probably get the
same effect from just using .promo. Of course sometimes you will want to
qualify a class with an element (e.g. if you have a generic .error class that
needs to look different when applied to different elements e.g.:
.error {
color: red;
}
div.error {
padding: 14px;
}
But generally avoid it where possible.
Another example of an over-qualified selector might be ul.nav li a{}. As
above, we can instantly drop the ul and because we know .nav is a list, we
therefore know that any a must be in an li, so we can get ul.nav li a{}
down to just .nav a{}.
Whilst it is true that browsers will only ever keep getting faster at rendering
CSS, efficiency is something you could do to keep an eye on. Short, unnested
selectors, not using the universal (*{}) selector as the key selector, and
avoiding more complex CSS3 selectors should help circumvent these problems.
Instead of using selectors to drill down the DOM to an element, it is often best
to put a class on the element you explicitly want to style. Let’s take a
specific example with a selector like .header ul{}…
Let’s imagine that ul is indeed the main navigation for our website. It lives
in the header as you might expect and is currently the only ul in there;
.header ul{} will work, but it’s not ideal or advisable. It’s not very future
proof and certainly not explicit enough. As soon as we add another ul to that
header it will adopt the styling of our main nav and the the chances are it
won’t want to. This means we either have to refactor a lot of code or undo a
lot of styling on subsequent uls in that .header to remove the effects of
the far reaching selector.
Your selector’s intent must match that of your reason for styling something;
ask yourself ‘am I selecting this because it’s a ul inside of .header or
because it is my site’s main nav?’. The answer to this will determine your
selector.
Make sure your key selector is never an element/type selector or
object/abstraction class. You never really want to see selectors like
.sidebar ul{} or .footer .media{} in our theme stylesheets.
Be explicit; target the element you want to affect, not its parent. Never assume that markup won’t change. Write selectors that target what you want, not what happens to be there already.
For a full write up please see the article Shoot to kill; CSS selector intent
Unless needed to override third party styles outside of our control, you should
never use !important.
Anytime a 'hack' such as this is employed, it should be included in your
_shame.scss (outlined below).
Always leave one space between the style value and the !important declaration
to improve readability.
.foo {
background-color: #bada55 !important;
}
The idea of shame.css is that you have a totally new stylesheet reserved just for your hacky code. The code you have to write to get the release out on time, but the code that makes you ashamed.
By putting your bodges, hacks and quick-fixes in their own file you do a few things:
- You make them stick out like a sore thumb.
- You keep your ‘main’ codebase clean.
- You make developers aware that their hacks are made very visible.
- You make them easier to isolate and fix.
- $ git blame shame.css.
Obviously you need some kind of rules and criteria:
- If it's a hack, it goes in shame.css.
- Document all hacks fully:
- What part of the codebase does it relate to?
- Why was this needed?
- How does this fix it?
- How might you fix it properly, given more time?
- Do not blame the developer; if they explained why they had to do it then their reasons are probably (hopefully) valid.
- Try and clean shame.css up when you have some down time.
- Even better, get a tech-debt story in which you can dedicate actual sprint time to it.
Original article by CSS-Wizardry: shame.css
A magic number is a number which is used because ‘it just works’. These are bad because they rarely work for any real reason and are not usually very futureproof or flexible/forgiving. They tend to fix symptoms and not problems.
For example, using .dropdown-nav li:hover ul{ top:37px; } to move a dropdown
to the bottom of the nav on hover is bad, as 37px is a magic number. 37px only
works here because in this particular scenario the .dropdown-nav happens to be
37px tall.
Instead you should use .dropdown-nav li:hover ul{ top:100%; } which means no
matter how tall the .dropdown-nav gets, the dropdown will always sit 100% from
the top.
Every time you hard code a number think twice (maybe even a third time); if
you can avoid it by using keywords or ‘aliases’ (i.e. top:100% to mean ‘all
the way from the top’) or—even better—no measurements at all then
you probably should.
Every hard-coded measurement you set is a commitment you might not necessarily want to keep.
IE stylesheets can, by and large, be totally avoided. The only time an IE stylesheet may be required is to circumvent blatant lack of support (e.g. PNG fixes).
As a general rule, all layout and box-model rules can and will work without an
IE stylesheet if you refactor and rework your CSS. This means you never want to
see <!--[if IE 7]> element{ margin-left:-9px; } < ![endif]--> or other such
CSS that is clearly using arbitrary styling to just ‘make stuff work’.
Use Modernizr.js to test for and target different support sets rather than device or software sniffing.
If you run into a CSS problem take code away before you start adding more in a bid to fix it. The problem exists in CSS that is already written, more CSS isn’t the right answer!
Delete chunks of markup and CSS until your problem goes away, then you can determine which part of the code the problem lies in.
It can be tempting to put an overflow:hidden; on something to hide the effects
of a layout quirk, but overflow was probably never the problem; fix the
problem, not its symptoms.
Use Modernizr.js to test for features when needed. Use the classes provided by Modernizr to set fallbacks or overrides for specific feature sets.
Place these styles at the end of the related stylesheet. For example, if you are
editing a styleheet called footer.scss and you need to write a specific style
for touch enabled devices, place the override at the bottom of footer.scss
We use a custom reset file that was originally based off of Eric Meyer's original css reset and then tweaked over the years.
Both SCSS and SASS versions are maintained on Github: Resets
Credit goes out to these guys as the inspiration and source of knowledge for much of this document.
- Harry Roberts - http://twitter.com/csswizardry
- Chris Coyier - http://twitter.com/real_css_tricks
- Kyle Kneath - http://twitter.com/kneath
- Dale Sande - http://twitter.com/anotheruiguy