- css is a thing no one wants to think about too much (its not "development")
- we haven't (or "can't") do markup/css properly.
- we think repeatible patterns are cool.
- tools != rules = a framework should allow us the greatest flexibility of implementation choices.
- Projects are beautiful unique snowflakes. There is technical debt and intricate tribal knowledge for every project
- There is no magic silver bullet tucked inside any framework.
- UI Frameworks are too smart for old platforms
- great for green field dev where framework abstraction is knowable
- for long term maintenance and back porting they are a vomitorium
- Frameworks mean learning someone elses methodologies which might not fit with what exists.
- Coding to a framework means UI controls of 100% of the markup 100% of the time. We don't. We can't always afford to fix it either.
- UI Frameworks are NOT like Java/php/python/C#/go frameworks.
- how many brushes do you need to apply paint?
- they provide patterns that appease UI/UX design principles.
- they keep "developers" in their place. Thinking about feature dev.
- UI Frameworks are HEAVY
- foundation is 192kb css complete (excluding JS)
- bootstrap is 132kb css complete (excluding JS)
- both foundation and bootstrap are full of bad practices ( heavy use of !important, descendant selectors, etc)
- learn the utility names and parameters and markup patterns inherant to the system
- what was the name of that variable again? its called "intellectual overhead"
- Pick a methodology
- Lightweight mixin libraries
- Only half dependant upon other peoples code
- Should be close to native css syntax
- Allows us to jump in providing just enough scaffolding to be useful
- Pick a framework
- Learn it
- Teach it
- Develop to it
- Refactoring the ui codebase over time (step into the chilly waters of despair!)
- Use what we need and toss the rest.