[Locked] Bootstrap css, what is the purpose?

[michellef25541473]

hi

i am a first time novice of dreamweaver 2017.

I'm using a boostrap starter template and i want to make changes to the bootstrap.css which is read only.  is there a reason why it is read only given the html wasn't?  should i simply mark it as writable and begin to 'attempt' to modify it.  or should i just delete the whole thing and start from scratch; which seems appealing now...

is there simpler way to begin to create a css with simple changes? or perhaps the better question is what shall i do begin a create a css style sheet from scratch as all the tutorials i have found seem to have 'prepared on earlier' and instead show how to modify.

thanks

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote
Sorry Michelle, I live in another time zone and only get to see the majority of posts when I arise from a good night's sleep. What I am about to say will make the whole thing even more confusing, so please skip the next part and go straight to my last line.
Anyone been to the Bootstrap site lately? The problems with Dreamweaver have already started! For anyone starting out now (Dreamweaver and the included Bootstrap) are going to find themselves in all sorts of strife. Even @Teodor, DMXZone, are now behind the eight ball.
Edit: It looks like the Bootstrap link does not work. Try http://getbootstrap.com/ 
I have created a few sites using Bootstrap 4; in my latest site I used Grid with Flexbox as a backup for the browsers that have not caught up / will not be updated. Still needs some tidying up, but seems to have the correct outcome.
For those that are interested, the following is what my SCSS looks like
/* General Layout */ html { height: 100%; font-family: Arial; font-weight: 400; overflow-y: scroll; @include media-breakpoint-up(xl) { background: url(../img/left-column.png) left top no-repeat fixed, url(../img/right-column.png) right top no-repeat fixed, url(../img/html-bg.png) center repeat; background-size: 39vh; } } body { height: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: column; } .container { max-width: 576px; @include media-breakpoint-up(md) { max-width: 1200px; } } .content { background-color: white; flex: 1 0 auto; } /* Home Page Layout */ #home.content { display: flex; flex-flow: row wrap; display: grid; grid-template-columns: 60% 40%; grid-template-areas: "main-area main-area" "right-sidebar left-sidebar"; >.col-main { flex: 1 100%; grid-area: main-area; } >.col-left { flex: 2 0; grid-area: left-sidebar; } >.col-right { flex: 3 0; grid-area: right-sidebar; } @include media-breakpoint-up(sm) { grid-template-columns: 20% 50% 30%; grid-template-areas: "left-sidebar main-area right-sidebar"; >.col-main { order: 2; flex: 5 0; } >.col-left { order: 1; flex: 2 0; } >.col-right { order: 3; flex: 3 0; } } } /* Contact Page Layout */ #contact.content { display: flex; flex-flow: row wrap; display: grid; grid-template-columns: 100%; grid-template-areas: "main-area" "right-sidebar"; >.col-main { flex: 1 100%; grid-area: main-area; } >.col-right { flex: 1 100%; grid-area: right-sidebar; } @include media-breakpoint-up(sm) { grid-template-columns: 50% 50%; grid-template-areas: "main-area right-sidebar"; >.col-main { flex: 1 0; } >.col-right { flex: 1 0; } } }

Just two breakpoints

• mobile
• the rest

In this period of transition/confusion, Al's Harmony Vibrations may be the best option for new-comers to web design/development. That way the newbie can learn HTML/CSS while creating the site.

You're killing me. 'Look no Bootstrap Ma'

[BenPleysier]

What is this then @include media-breakpoint-up(sm)?

FYI: Bootstrap is a framework that can be used as is or moulded into what is more appropriate. In my example I discarded the Bootstrap Grid, but my site still uses all of the other Bootstrap stuff.

Os, please, don't kick the bucket yet!

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote
What is this then @include media-breakpoint-up(sm)?
FYI: Bootstrap is a framework that can be used as is or moulded into what is more appropriate. In my example I discarded the Bootstrap Grid, but my site still uses all of the other Bootstrap stuff.

That's progress

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

Edit: It looks like the Bootstrap link does not work. Try http://getbootstrap.com/

Could be its just moved from Alpha to Beta

[BenPleysier]

The URL used to point to Bootstrap 3

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

The URL used to point to Bootstrap 3

I see, well v4 is obviously deemed as stable and ready to use now. It was scheduled for August, so they made it.

Wonder what Adobe will do now and how fast they are going to react as I would say almost cetainly Bootstrap v3 is dead and not worth investing time in learning. Do Adobe even have a product at the moment

[Nancy OShea]

I would not say Bootstrap 3 is dead.  Unlike Bootstrap 2 before it, 3 will continue to be maintained alongside 4 for the people who want to keep using it and/or need to support older browsers & plugins. 

The question is, which version or versions of Bootstrap will DW embrace?  And when?

Nancy

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Nancy+OShea  wrote

I would not say Bootstrap 3 is dead.  Unlike Bootstrap 2 before it, 3 will continue to be maintained alongside 4 for the people who want to keep using it and/or need to support older browsers & plugins. 

The question is, which version or versions of Bootstrap will DW embrace?  And when?

When I say dead, I  mean for any new developer wanting to jump on the Bootstrap band wagon, why waste time learning v3 when it's now outdated, unless of course going back to one of your points made earlier someone gets a Bootstrap 3 developed site handed off to them for maintainance. Another reason not to use frameworks because you will continually have to either remember a myriad of old and new classes or your time will be more and more devoted, not to a actually producing any code, but pawing through lists of classes to figure out what does what in which version, yuck.

[BenPleysier]

osgood_  wrote

When I say dead, I  mean for any new developer wanting to jump on the Bootstrap band wagon, why waste time learning v3 when it's now outdated, unless of course going back to one of your points made earlier someone gets a Bootstrap 3 developed site handed off to them for maintenance. Another reason not to use frameworks because you will continually have to either remember a myriad of old and new classes or your time will be more and more devoted, not to a actually producing any code, but pawing through lists of classes to figure out what does what in which version, yuck.

I need Bootstrap 3 for the sites that I have built using the version and I appreciate the visual tools that are available so that I do not have to remember all of the classes. A pity that Bootstrap illiterates have not broadened their horizon like a very large section of the web development community has done. And then to think that these illiterates are the biggest critics of the framework, yuck.

osgood_  wrote

That has to be a joke, I still smirk when I watch one of those DMXzone videos. I lose count of how many times one needs to click this or that panel/menu to get anything done. I guess its one of only a few options for those who are code illterate but 'time-saving', not always.

Keep smirking because there are many more 'click' videos to come.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

I need Bootstrap 3 for the sites that I have built using the version and I appreciate the visual tools that are available so that I do not have to remember all of the classes. A pity that Bootstrap illiterates have not broadened their horizon like a very large section of the web development community has done. And then to think that these illiterates are the biggest critics of the framework, yuck.

Need I say more, you need v3, v4, v5 etc - everytime a new version is released you need to retain the workflow/classes/styling used in the previous versions or rely on some information written on a bit of paper, or in your case electronically. I'm willing to bet you can't even write a Bootstrap navbar in v3 and v4 without resorting to some kind of 'helper'

BenPleysier  wrote

Keep smirking because there are many more 'click' videos to come.

Yeah it breaks me up every time I watch one of those, even more so with that funny voice.

[BenPleysier]

osgood_  wrote

I'm willing to bet you can't even write a Bootstrap navbar in v3 and v4 without resorting to some kind of 'helper'

Here we go again, with wild baseless accusations. If I could trust you to keep your end of the bargain, I would gladly accept the wager. As part of the bargain I would suggest that you produce one fully functioning responsive master/detail page using Ajax and PDO within 10 minutes as per Master-Detail Relationship with App Connect - YouTube

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

osgood_   wrote

I'm willing to bet you can't even write a Bootstrap navbar in v3 and v4 without resorting to some kind of 'helper'

Here we go again, with wild baseless accusations. If I could trust you to keep your end of the bargain, I would gladly accept the wager. As part of the bargain I would suggest that you produce one fully functioning responsive master/detail page using Ajax and PDO within 10 minutes as per Master-Detail Relationship with App Connect - YouTube

Why would I want to use PDO when I use mysqli? Plus that's 10mins asumming you know your way around the application. Lets add another 10 mins on to be safe then a further 1hr to revise the the workflow, that's assuming your not happy with what you get given out of the box, as most discerning developers probably would not be...........

[Teodor K]

Even @Teodor, DMXZone, are now behind the eight ball.

Hey BenPleysier​

No, actually we are not! Why? You will find out really soon

[BenPleysier]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

No, actually we are not! Why? You will find out really soon

And that is what I like about DMXzone - and PVII for that matter- , they are pro-active and enrich Dreamweaver with their time-saving extensions.

[pziecina]

I'm going to probably confuse a few people now.

I don't think Dw should drop bootstrap support, or drop support for v3 when v4 is included, (if it ever is) move it to an extension yes, add bootstrap v4 as an optional extension, also yes.

Dw should stand behind its users who have moved to using bootstrap for creating rwd sites, it is not that i agree with using bootstrap, but i do think that some continuity should be maintained for users, as unlike dropping outdated techs or methods, bootstrap is still current.

[BenPleysier]

No confusion here. I am in complete agreeance. At the moment I have extensions for Bootstrap v2 and v3 with v4 just around the corner.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K   wrote

No, actually we are not! Why? You will find out really soon

And that is what I like about DMXzone - and PVII for that matter- , they are pro-active and enrich Dreamweaver with their time-saving extensions.

That has to be a joke, I still smirk when I watch one of those DMXzone videos. I lose count of how many times one needs to click this or that panel/menu to get anything done. I guess its one of only a few options for those who are code illterate but 'time-saving', not always.

[Teodor K]

Funny comment from a person who has never used DMXzone extensions.

I am pretty sure that i will be at least 4 time faster using these panels to setup the following on a blank new page, than you using your saved snippets and hand coding it.

- Setting up a new db connection to a new server and new db table using PDO on PHP7

- Creating a database query

- Adding a responsive table, listing the records from the query and adding a real-time Ajax filter (searching in multiple columns), as well as making all of the table columns sortable on click (sorting numbers, strings and dates).

The task above takes exactly a minute and 45 seconds clicking around all of these panels and menus and you have the page running and styled.

So no - obviously it is not time saving

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

The task above takes exactly a minute and 45 seconds clicking around all of these panels and menus and you have the page running and styled.

So no - obviously it is not time saving

That's funny 'Deleting a datbase record' according to the video takes a least 5mins (that's assuming you know what you are doing)....

Deleting Database Records - YouTube

[Teodor K]

Well, it is 5 mins in the video, because of the explanations going along. In real life it is no more than 2 mins and that is with setting up the database connection and the query... in most cases it would take like 40seconds to set it up, as you have already connected to the db and created the queries, which you reuse later.

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

Well, it is 5 mins in the video, because of the explanations going along. In real life it is no more than 2 mins and that is with setting up the database connection and the query... in most cases it would take like 40seconds to set it up, as you have already connected to the db and created the queries, which you reuse later.

That's assuming you can remember the sequence of clicks after perhaps not using it for a while. Anyway I'll stiick to using a mysqli delete snippet where I only have to change the database connection details and update a few column names.

Youre extensions are great for those that wish to follow that kind of workflow or may have no alternative but to do so - so your stuff fills a gap in the market, no doubt. I just can't see myself going down that route, would drive me insane having to do all that clicking.....

I appreciate you have put a lot of work into it!

[Teodor K]

There is not much to remember actually. Connection->query->delete and then execute this on button click.

I doubt it is harder to remember than opening your connection file, and find->replace the column names.

Also i am not saying you must do it using any extension, it is just these tools do really save time.

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

There is not much to remember actually. Connection->query->delete and then execute this on button click.

I doubt it is harder to remember than opening your connection file, and find->replace the column names.

Also i am not saying you must do it using any extension, it is just these tools do really save time.

No doubt in some instances extensions will save time, in some cases maybe not. The objection for me is a lot will be injecting code which they have no real idea how it works. If they are hobbyists then fair enough, plenty of those - if not I dont necessary agree its a positive approach unless they know what is going on and how to manipulate the code should they require to to so for any reason.

[pziecina]

Just so everyone knows who is locking this thread, i am.

This discussion has now gone so far of topic that it has nothing to do with the original question.

Paula.