The style itself is pleasant enough, as a basic old school default style. However, the coding behind it sounds interesting. I'll take a closer look.
I agree that bidi.css, or at least most of it, should be redundant these days. Most of it can be ditched by using flex and grid, along with start/end for things like text-align, and inline margins and padding. You may still need a couple of .rtl declarations in places, but not enough to warrant an entire file. I'm almost at the point of thinking that same could apply to responsive.css too.
Re the use of SVG: One trick I like is using an .svg as a CSS mask for an element that has a background colour defined. It allows keeping the SVG code out of the template (meaning you can swap SVG's easily) while allowing the displayed colour of the SVG to change in response to CSS changes. It's ideal (IMO) for multi-variant styles where you want icons to change colour by variant.
The config.html interests me too. I've never played with that idea, but it seems very easy to implement.![:)]( "Smile")
I agree that bidi.css, or at least most of it, should be redundant these days. Most of it can be ditched by using flex and grid, along with start/end for things like text-align, and inline margins and padding. You may still need a couple of .rtl declarations in places, but not enough to warrant an entire file. I'm almost at the point of thinking that same could apply to responsive.css too.
Re the use of SVG: One trick I like is using an .svg as a CSS mask for an element that has a background colour defined. It allows keeping the SVG code out of the template (meaning you can swap SVG's easily) while allowing the displayed colour of the SVG to change in response to CSS changes. It's ideal (IMO) for multi-variant styles where you want icons to change colour by variant.
The config.html interests me too. I've never played with that idea, but it seems very easy to implement.
Statistics: Posted by Gumboots — Wed Mar 19, 2025 11:07 pm