We've been using Bootstrap for a couple of our projects at Talis and I have been incredibly pleased with it. I have zero design sense (designed by East German engineers for East German engineers - no offense to East German engineers), and Bootstrap manages to make my clumsy, ham-handed, functionality-first-aesthetic-never designs, look decent (even if they *all* look like Twitter's demo app). If I can do nothing else, design-wise, I can add to 12 (usually).
I haven't used Foundation, but that being said, looking over the documentation for it, I don't see any fundamental differences between it or Bootstrap functionality-wise. What I *do* see, offhand, is much better documentation regarding the css being introduced. Bootstrap's documentation is (overall) pretty good, but I feel there are TONS of UI thingies in the css that aren't mentioned in the docs and my desire to trawl through the css and try things (or understand by looking at it) just isn't there.
So, basically, I think it doesn't make much of a difference either way, but the documentation-thing *seems* (at-a-glance) to possibly favor Foundation (although Bootstrap may be better in the things it has documentation for - not sure).
On May 10, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Jessie Keck 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