just to mention, I don't think Less works with jruby, so if you use
Bootstrap, you have to use the static assets and can't use the
generators...




On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Shaun Ellis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I have not used Foundation, but from what I can see, it offers a subset of
> the features that you get with Bootstrap.  I suppose that's what they mean
> by "light" framework.  The idea that it is designed to be overridden is a
> bit of a strange claim as I don't see how it's any different from overriding
> any other base stylesheet. I've been overriding styles in Bootstrap simply
> by creating an override.css file from the beginning.
>
> We are currently in the last stages of the "prototype phase" for our Finding
> Aids site and will be going into beta soon.  It currently looks like a
> "Bootstrap site", hence the "samification" that the List Apart article
> mentions, and I will soon need to Princeton-ify it (aka "tiger style").
>
> I think that the transition to a custom site that stands out from other
> Bootstrap sites is not particularly easy if you've been using Bootstrap out
> of the box and overriding it like I've been doing.  This is because there
> are standard/shared colors and styles that are set as variables in Less.
>  It's a lot more laborious to go through and override these manually than
> simply change the variables in Less.
>
> If you are interested in using Bootstrap, I would recommend designing a
> style guide (or UI pattern library, as Matthew called it) for your own
> institution and building it with Less, which is my next step.  This guide
> will provide me and my colleagues custom variations on components, but I
> plan to maintain the architecture of the Bootstrap site.  I just love how
> organized it is, and how easy it is to simply copy code from the examples.
>
> Furthermore, it will be easier to keep such a style guide in sync with
> future Bootstrap versions.  I'm currently putting off upgrading to Bootstrap
> 2.0 because they changed the default grid and I didn't start the project
> using Less.  Finally, other developers at your institution can use the same
> custom guide as easily as they would the Bootstrap site for grabbing and
> quickly implementing their design conventions.
>
> I don't regret not using Less out of the gate since it was pretty foreign to
> me at the time, and I really just wanted to get going quickly with
> prototyping the architecture.
>
> Cheers,
> Shaun
>
>
> On 5/11/12 9:27 AM, Joseph Gilbert wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jessie,
>>
>> I've used Bootstrap more than Foundation, but both are solid choices.
>> There are some relatively minor differences: Bootstrap uses LESS while
>> Foundation is CSS with an officially supported SASS version; Bootstrap
>> has a few more JS widgets thrown in.
>>
>> One philosophical distinction seems to lie in the "it’s designed to be
>> overridden" line in the article Tom mentions.  Bootstrap looks good
>> right out of the box, but the underlying styles are also a bit more
>> complex and therefore sometimes require a little more effort to tweak.
>>  Bootstrap out-of-the-box and without customizations--a bit like
>> jQueryUI before it--is already starting to seem hackneyed, but
>> assuming you all will be doing institutional customizations, either
>> library, I think, will give you a good starting point.
>>
>> Best,
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joseph Gilbert
>> User Experience Web Developer
>> University of Virginia Library
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Tom Keays<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> I read this awhile back. It's by someone associated with the
>>> Foundation project.
>>>
>>>  http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dive-into-responsive-prototyping-with-foundation/
>>> Both look good. Like you, I looked hard at Bootstrap after the
>>> conference, but haven't really done anything with it. I'd be
>>> interested which framework you settle on.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Jessie Keck<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> We are about to develop a set of style-guids and templates for our
>>>> locally developed applications that will have a unified look and feel.  One
>>>> manifestation of this will be a ruby gem that we will use for all of our
>>>> rails apps (including Blacklight and Hydra applications).
>>>>
>>>> As we were discussing the approaches we may take for this, the question
>>>> of basing our designs on a library such as Bootstrap or Foundation came up.
>>>>  I have heard a lot about Bootstrap in the C4L community, but very little
>>>> about Foundation.  Does anybody here have extensive experience w/ both
>>>> libraries and would recommend one over the other?
>>>>
>>>> We are already leaning towards Bootstrap as many in the Blacklight and
>>>> Hydra communities have expressed interest or are using it already.  Also,
>>>> some folks locally who have used or investigated both libraries have had
>>>> positive experiences in either case.
>>>>
>>>> Understanding that this may be boil down to a simple matter of taste, I
>>>> wonder what opinions you all have.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> - Jessie Keck
>>>> Stanford University
>
>
> --
> Shaun D. Ellis
> Digital Library Interface Developer
> Firestone Library, Princeton University
> voice: 609.258.1698 | [log in to unmask]