我一直严重依赖CSS的一个网站,我正在工作。现在,所有的CSS样式都是在每个标签的基础上应用的,所以现在我试图将它移动到更多的外部样式,以帮助任何未来的变化。

但现在的问题是,我已经注意到我得到了一个“CSS爆炸”。我很难决定如何在CSS文件中最好地组织和抽象数据。

我在网站中使用了大量的div标签,从一个基于表格的网站。我得到了很多这样的CSS选择器:

div.title {
  background-color: blue;
  color: white;
  text-align: center;
}

div.footer {
  /* Styles Here */
}

div.body {
  /* Styles Here */
}

/* And many more */

这还不算太糟,但由于我是初学者,我想知道是否可以就如何最好地组织CSS文件的各个部分提出建议。我不想在我的网站上的每个元素都有一个单独的CSS属性,我总是希望CSS文件是相当直观和易于阅读的。

我的最终目标是使它易于使用CSS文件,并证明他们的力量,以提高web开发的速度。这样,将来可能在这个网站上工作的其他人也将开始使用良好的编码实践,而不必像我一样学习。


当前回答

我的回答是高水平的,针对你刚才提到的高水平的关切。也许你可以通过一些低级的组织技巧和调整来使它更漂亮,但这些都不能解决方法上的缺陷。有几个因素会影响CSS的爆炸。显然是网站的整体复杂性,但还有像命名语义、CSS性能、CSS文件组织和可测试性/可接受性等问题。

在命名语义方面,您似乎走在了正确的道路上,但还可以更进一步。重复出现在站点上而没有进行结构修改的HTML部分(称为“模块”)可以被视为选择器根,从那里您可以相对于根确定内部布局的范围。这是面向对象的CSS的基本原则,您可以在Yahoo工程师的演讲中阅读/观看更多关于它的内容。

需要注意的是,这种干净的方法可能与性能问题相反,它倾向于基于id或标记名的短选择器。找到平衡取决于你,但除非你有一个庞大的网站,这应该只是一个指南在你的脑后提醒你保持你的选择器简短。这里有更多关于性能的信息。

最后,您将为整个网站使用一个CSS文件,还是多个文件(单个基本文件用于每个页面或-section文件)?单个文件对于性能来说更好,但是对于多个团队成员来说可能更难理解/维护,并且可能更难测试。对于测试,我建议您使用一个CSS测试页面,其中包含所有受支持的CSS模块,以测试冲突和意外级联。

或者,您也可以采用多文件方法,将CSS规则作用于一个页面或一个部分。这需要浏览器下载多个文件,这是一个性能问题。您可以使用服务器端编程动态地指定和聚合(并缩小)CSS文件到单个文件中。但是,由于这些文件是分开的,对它们的测试也是分开的,因此可能会在页面/部分之间引入不一致的外观。因此测试变得更加困难。

由你来分析客户的具体需求,并相应地平衡这些问题。

其他回答

合理CSS的核心原则,摘自CSS重构:从仅追加到模块化CSS

Write in SASS. You'd be insane to forego the advantages of variables, mixins, and so on. Never use an HTML ID for styling; always use classes. HTML IDs, when used correctly, appear only once in the whole page, which is the complete opposite of re-usability — one of the most basic goods in sensible engineering. Moreover, it's really hard to override selectors containing IDs and often the only way to overpower one HTML ID is to create another ID, causing IDs to propagate in the codebase like the pests they are. Better to leave the HTML IDs for unchanging Javascript or integration test hooks. Name your CSS classes by their visual function rather than by their application-specific function. For example, say ".highlight-box" instead of ".bundle-product-discount-box". Coding in this way means that you can re-use your existing style-sheets when you role out side-businesses. For example, we started out selling law notes but recently moved into law tutors. Our old CSS classes had names like ".download_document_box", a class name that makes sense when talking about digital documents but would only confuse when applied to the new domain of private tutors. A better name that fits both existing services — and any future ones — would be ".pretty_callout_box". Avoid naming CSS classes after specific grid information. There was (and still is) a dreadful anti-pattern in CSS communities whereby designers and creators of CSS frameworks (cough Twitter Bootstrap) believe that "span-2" or "cols-8" are reasonable names for CSS classes. The point of CSS is to give you the possibility to modify your design without affecting the markup (much). Hardcoding grids sizes into the HTML thwarts this goal, so it is advised against in any project expected to last longer than a weekend. More on how we avoided grid classes later. Split your CSS across files. Ideally you would split everything into "components"/"widgets" and then compose pages from these atoms of design. Realistically though, you'll notice that some of your website pages have idiosyncrasies (e.g. a special layout, or a weird photo gallery that appears in just one article). In these cases you might create a file related to that specific page, only refactoring into a full-blown widget when it becomes clear that the element will be re-used elsewhere. This is a tradeoff, one that is motivated by practical budgetary concerns. Minimise nesting. Introduce new classes instead of nesting selectors. The fact that SASS removes the pain of repeating selectors when nesting doesn't mean that you have to nest five levels deep. Never over-qualify a selector (e.g. don't use "ul.nav" where ".nav" could do the same job.) And don't specify HTML elements alongside the custom class name (e.g."h2.highlight"). Instead just use the class name alone and drop the base selector (e.g. the previous example should be ".highlight"). Over-qualifying selectors doesn't add any value. Create styles for HTML elements (e.g. "h1") only when styling base components which should be consistent in the whole application. Avoid broad selectors like "header ul" because it's likely that you have to override them in some places anyway. As we keep saying, most of the time you want to use a specific, well-named class whenever you want a particular style. Embrace the basics of Block-Element-Modifier. You can read about it for example on here. We used it quite lightly, but still it helped us a lot in organising CSS styles.

这是一个非常好的问题。在我所看到的任何地方,CSS文件都倾向于在一段时间后失去控制——尤其是,但不仅仅是在团队中工作时。

以下是我自己努力遵守的规则(并不是说我总能做到)。

Refactor early, refactor often. Frequently clean up CSS files, fuse together multiple definitions of the same class. Remove obsolete definitions immediately. When adding CSS during fixing bugs, leave a comment as to what the change does ("This is to make sure the box is left aligned in IE < 7") Avoid redundancies, e.g. defining the same thing in .classname and .classname:hover. Use comments /** Head **/ to build a clear structure. Use a prettifier tool that helps maintain a constant style. I use Polystyle, with which I'm quite happy (costs $15 but is money well spent). There are free ones around as well (e.g. Code Beautifier based on CSS Tidy, an open-source tool). Build sensible classes. See below for a few notes on this. Use semantics, avoid DIV soup - use <ul>s for menus, for example. Define everything on as low a level as possible (e.g. a default font family, colour and size in the body) and use inherit where possible If you have very complex CSS, maybe a CSS pre-compiler helps. I'm planning to look into xCSS for the very same reason soon. There are several others around. If working in a team, highlight the necessity of quality and standards for CSS files as well. Everybody's big on coding standards in their programming language(s), but there is little awareness that this is necessary for CSS too. If working in a team, do consider using Version Control. It makes things that much easier to track, and editing conflicts that much easier to solve. It's really worth it, even if you're "just" into HTML and CSS. Do not work with !important. Not only because IE =< 7 can't deal with it. In a complex structure, the use of !important is often tempting to change a behaviour whose source can't be found, but it's poison for long-term maintenance.

构建合理的类

这就是我喜欢构建合理类的方式。

我首先应用全局设置:

body { font-family: .... font-size ... color ... }
a { text-decoration: none; }

然后,我确定页面布局的主要部分。顶部区域、菜单、内容和页脚。如果我写了好的标记,这些区域将与HTML结构相同。

然后,我开始构建CSS类,在合理的情况下指定尽可能多的祖先,并将相关类尽可能紧密地分组。

div.content ul.table_of_contents 
div.content ul.table_of_contents li 
div.content ul.table_of_contents li h1
div.content ul.table_of_contents li h2
div.content ul.table_of_contents li span.pagenumber

你可以把整个CSS结构想象成一棵树,它的定义越远越具体。你想要尽可能地减少课程的数量,并且尽可能少地重复学习。

例如,假设您有三个级别的导航菜单。 这三个菜单看起来不同,但它们也有一些共同的特征。例如,它们都是<ul>,它们都有相同的字体大小,并且项目都是彼此相邻的(与ul的默认呈现相反)。此外,所有菜单都没有项目符号(list-style-type)。

首先,在一个名为menu的类中定义公共特征:

div.navi ul.menu { display: ...; list-style-type: none; list-style-image: none; }
div.navi ul.menu li { float: left }

然后,定义这三个菜单的具体特征。第1级是40像素高;2级和3级,20像素。

注意:您也可以为此使用多个类,但Internet Explorer 6在使用多个类时存在问题,因此本例使用id。

div.navi ul.menu#level1 { height: 40px; }
div.navi ul.menu#level2 { height: 20px; }
div.navi ul.menu#level3 { height: 16px; }

菜单的标记看起来像这样:

<ul id="level1" class="menu"><li> ...... </li></ul>
<ul id="level2" class="menu"><li> ...... </li></ul>
<ul id="level3" class="menu"><li> ...... </li></ul>

如果页面上有语义相似的元素(比如这三个菜单),首先试着找出共性,然后把它们放到一个类中;然后,计算出特定的属性并将它们应用到类中,或者,如果您必须支持Internet Explorer 6,则应用ID。

其他HTML技巧

如果你将这些语义添加到HTML输出中,设计师以后可以使用纯CSS定制网站和/或应用程序的外观,这是一个很大的优势和节省时间。

If possible, give every page's body a unique class: <body class='contactpage'> this makes it very easy to add page-specific tweaks to the style sheet: body.contactpage div.container ul.mainmenu li { color: green } When building menus automatically, add as much CSS context as possible to allow extensive styling later. For example: <ul class="mainmenu"> <li class="item_first item_active item_1"> First item </li> <li class="item_2"> Second item </li> <li class="item_3"> Third item </li> <li class="item_last item_4"> Fourth item </li> </ul> This way, every menu item can be accessed for styling according to its semantic context: Whether it's the first or last item in the list; Whether it's the currently active item; and by number.

请注意,如上例中所述的多个类的分配在IE6中不能正常工作。有一个变通方案可以使IE6能够处理多个类。如果没有解决方法,则必须设置对您来说最重要的类(项目编号、活动或第一个/最后一个),或者使用id。

您还应该了解级联、权重以及它们是如何工作的。

我注意到您只使用了类标识符(div.title)。您知道您也可以使用ID,而且ID比类更重要吗?

例如,

#page1 div.title, #page1 ul, #page1 span {
  // rules
}

将使所有这些元素共享一个字体大小,或者颜色,或者任何你的规则。您甚至可以使所有的div都是#page1的后代获得某些规则。

至于重量,请记住CSS轴从最一般/最轻到最特定/最重。也就是说,在CSS选择器中,一个元素说明符被一个类说明符取代,一个ID说明符取代。数字计数,因此具有两个元素说明符(ul li)的选择器将比只有一个说明符(li)的选择器具有更大的权重。

把它想象成数字。个位上的9仍然小于十位上的1。一个有ID说明符、一个类说明符和两个元素说明符的选择器,将比没有ID、500个类说明符和1000个元素说明符的选择器具有更大的权重。当然,这是一个荒谬的例子,但你可以理解。关键是,应用这个概念可以帮助您清理大量CSS。

顺便说一句,在类中添加元素说明符(div.title)是没有必要的,除非你遇到了与其他具有class="title"的元素冲突。不要增加不必要的重量,因为你以后可能会用到这些重量。

以下是4个例子:

CSS约定/代码布局模型 在编写我的第一个样式表时,我应该遵循哪些CSS标准? 整理CSS的最佳方法是什么? 最佳实践- CSS样式表格式

在所有4个问题上,我的回答都包含了下载并阅读Natalie Downe的PDF CSS系统的建议。(PDF包含了大量幻灯片上没有的注释,所以请阅读PDF!)注意她对组织的建议。

四年后,我想说:

Use a CSS pre-processor and manage your files as partials (I personally prefer Sass with Compass, but Less is quite good as well and there are others) Read up on concepts like OOCSS, SMACSS, and BEM or getbem. Take a look at how popular CSS frameworks like Bootstrap and Zurb Foundation are structured. And don't discount less popular frameworks - Inuit is an interesting one but there are plenty others. Combine/minify your files with a build step on a continuous integration server and/or a task runner like Grunt or Gulp.

我的回答是高水平的,针对你刚才提到的高水平的关切。也许你可以通过一些低级的组织技巧和调整来使它更漂亮,但这些都不能解决方法上的缺陷。有几个因素会影响CSS的爆炸。显然是网站的整体复杂性,但还有像命名语义、CSS性能、CSS文件组织和可测试性/可接受性等问题。

在命名语义方面,您似乎走在了正确的道路上,但还可以更进一步。重复出现在站点上而没有进行结构修改的HTML部分(称为“模块”)可以被视为选择器根,从那里您可以相对于根确定内部布局的范围。这是面向对象的CSS的基本原则,您可以在Yahoo工程师的演讲中阅读/观看更多关于它的内容。

需要注意的是,这种干净的方法可能与性能问题相反,它倾向于基于id或标记名的短选择器。找到平衡取决于你,但除非你有一个庞大的网站,这应该只是一个指南在你的脑后提醒你保持你的选择器简短。这里有更多关于性能的信息。

最后,您将为整个网站使用一个CSS文件,还是多个文件(单个基本文件用于每个页面或-section文件)?单个文件对于性能来说更好,但是对于多个团队成员来说可能更难理解/维护,并且可能更难测试。对于测试,我建议您使用一个CSS测试页面,其中包含所有受支持的CSS模块,以测试冲突和意外级联。

或者,您也可以采用多文件方法,将CSS规则作用于一个页面或一个部分。这需要浏览器下载多个文件,这是一个性能问题。您可以使用服务器端编程动态地指定和聚合(并缩小)CSS文件到单个文件中。但是,由于这些文件是分开的,对它们的测试也是分开的,因此可能会在页面/部分之间引入不一致的外观。因此测试变得更加困难。

由你来分析客户的具体需求,并相应地平衡这些问题。