Consider a minified version of normalize.css

[necolas]

A recommendation from @mathias for people who may not want to edit/adapt the code in normalize.css but include it (as is) in their site or framework , and then override later in the stylesheet or in a separate stylesheet.

This isn't my preferred way to use normalize.css because one of the points of the project is to move away from having separate "CSS includes" or "black boxes".

However, it is probably inevitable that it will be used this way. If there is interest or arguments in favour of a minified version, please express it here.

[nodeGarden]

Admitably, I'd be using it that way too :) +1

[birkof]

Same here :D

[necolas]

Would you guys mind explaining the reasons why you'd use a minified version rather than customise the CSS, or harvest the parts you need for the project? Thanks

[nodeGarden]

cleanliness (at least in MY head). If I were to use it as the base CSS and
just add onto it, its the same thing as including it and adding into it...
but then I'm cluttered with a bunch of stuff thats not changing. Better to
compartmentalize it. Take that as an aside, and update it anytime I want
something to be global, and then just overload (in the sense of duplicate
class name to add more attributes) stuff on an as-needed basis. Then I'm
only having to look at stuff that is specific to my customizations. To me
its the same as using a framework for backend development. I don't duplicate
the core every time, I just overload the functions I want to add onto, or
extend.

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:02 AM, necolas <
reply@reply.github.com>wrote:

Would you guys mind explaining the reasons why you'd use a minified version
rather than customise the CSS, or harvest the parts you need for the
project? Thanks

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#4 (comment)

[RobertAudi]

I think a minified version is not a good idea on its own because it will encourage people to use the css without customizing it or even reading it. On the other hand, a minification script would be useful if shipped with the css, it would encourage the people to read and customize the css and minify it as soon as they're done.

[firemonkeyio]

+1 for including a minified version. Yes it's against the project goals.... but I often include the minified AND uncompressed versions of js/css files in my project... only use the minified one - but have the uncompressed one around incase I need to debug something.

Also CSS minification is not as cryptic as javascript minification... and still exposes it's self to simple edits (using find and/or find and replace)

[ericdfields]

-1 for minification. By not including it, you encourage users to at least half-glance at the code they're actually adding to their system. By including it, you'll probably have more than a handful of users just adding it to their sites because "that's what everyone else is doing" before taking the time to understand the code a bit.

[maaku]

+1 for minification. Because treating normalize.css as a black box IS the best way to use it. Asking developers to modify normalize.css on a per-project basis is bad software design.

[necolas]

@maaku How so? Why not just edit the styles for an element rather than repeating selectors and declarations, making debugging more difficult, and failing to understand what the CSS is doing.

[maaku]

@necolas Simple, it breaks encapsulation, increasing the complexity of the resulting code. Of more practical concern, editing normalize.css directly makes it difficult to merge in updates later. I assume there will be updates, if not from you then from someone who is using normalize.css and scratching an itch. If I treat normalize.css as a plug-n-play “black box” that I include and then selectively override in my own stylesheets, I can easily upgrade without problems.

[necolas]

On an existing site, you wouldn't update a reset.css from 2008 with one from 2011, because it could create a different set of base styles and require modification of the CSS that is build upon it. In the same way, depending on the changes made, you wouldn't want to blindly update a normalize.css file whenever the code in the repo changes.

[justinlabenne]

-1 for minification. Providing it in a "black box" or "reset" fashion seems to defeat the original intention of reducing redundant styling per element because people will drop it in and just go about overriding it.

Minification can be done quick and easy using a variety of tools and developers will probably be minifing their js files so I doubt it will be a showstopper to also do some css at production time.

[mathiasbynens]

developers will probably be minifing their js files

In my experience, a lot of people would include/copy-paste whatever assets that make their lives easier, without even looking at it. It’s sad, I know, but it is how it is. Projects like normalize.css and HTML5 Boilerplate encourage users to get rid of the stuff they don’t need, but let’s face it — a lot of times this just doesn’t happen. (Cfr. hotpink selected text.)

The only reason I suggested adding a minified version to the repo is that those people – who just copy/paste and don’t look back – would at least have a chance of copying a minified version.

[justinlabenne]

@mathiasbynens, I completely agree that most people will copy/paste. I think adding the minfied version will unfortunately promote this behavior (bad) since comments will probably be stripped, but then again a minified version that can be used "black box" style may also help promote the project and get more people using it (good) since they can just drop it in. Maybe then they will come back and actually read about it when things are not working quite the way they want.

Slightly torn, but leaving the version that the copy-paster would use full of comments and non-minified may get them to read, even if by accident.

[7fe]

Under a deadline people will do what is fastest. There will either copy and paste unminimized normalize.css and move on, or feel the css should be minified, therefore resulting to another equivalent of normalize.css.

Personally I think a black box isn't the biggest. Most people look at jQuery and see a magical black box. They think jQuery has superpowers when using the $. Do people care that they don't understand jQuery, well for the most part no.

It would be most valuable if we added a warning or getting started section that emphasizes the typical warnings and fixes that are typically done. For example:

1st start by linking the stylesheet in the head of your document. Now be default normalize.css does x,x, and x. It also fixes some of the spacing issues in IE.... Notice all stongs, are bold and ems, and i are italicized.