<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Weekly Release Blog #40: Evolving Site Design Using CSS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://exortech.com/blog/2009/08/31/weekly-release-blog-40-evolving-site-design-using-css/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://exortech.com/blog/2009/08/31/weekly-release-blog-40-evolving-site-design-using-css/</link>
	<description>Peripatetic thinking</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2011 18:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Hirtle</title>
		<link>http://exortech.com/blog/2009/08/31/weekly-release-blog-40-evolving-site-design-using-css/comment-page-1/#comment-439</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hirtle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:32:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://exortech.com/blog/?p=209#comment-439</guid>
		<description>The key to maintainability seems to be avoiding dependencies between styles because at some point someone (possibly you, weeks later) will come along and change a depended-upon style.

But to avoid dependencies, you end up duplicating styles, which also creates maintainability problems. For example, when forking a class (as described in #4), you&#039;ll probably end up duplicating a lot of styles. On the other hand, overriding styles (as in #5) would create dependencies.

Here&#039;s an interesting discussion about Redundancy vs. Dependency:
http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2005/01/20/redundancy_v/

I think the described approach will work if everyone adheres to it. I wonder if there will be problems with people using different top-level classes, though. For example, what if someone wraps form.standard in div.container and starts using that as the top-level element?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The key to maintainability seems to be avoiding dependencies between styles because at some point someone (possibly you, weeks later) will come along and change a depended-upon style.</p>
<p>But to avoid dependencies, you end up duplicating styles, which also creates maintainability problems. For example, when forking a class (as described in #4), you&#8217;ll probably end up duplicating a lot of styles. On the other hand, overriding styles (as in #5) would create dependencies.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s an interesting discussion about Redundancy vs. Dependency:<br />
<a href="http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2005/01/20/redundancy_v/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2005/01/20/redundancy_v/</a></p>
<p>I think the described approach will work if everyone adheres to it. I wonder if there will be problems with people using different top-level classes, though. For example, what if someone wraps form.standard in div.container and starts using that as the top-level element?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

