Responsive Grid Frameworks

[ronaldroe]

It seems like we have a trend lately with the use (or overuse) of frameworks. Specifically, responsive frameworks like Bootstrap, or grid frameworks/generators. I was just wondering everyone's thoughts on them.

For me, a responsive layout is way too easy to write to bother with them. Most of it can be done using percentages, floats and min/max-width in the initial style declaration. From there, it isn't like media queries are difficult. Also, it all just kinda smells like the same trend we went through a few years ago (960gs, anyone?), and we dumped those because they were unnecessarily bloating code.

 

[d a v e]

wtf - thanks, just starting with http://www.getskeleton.com/ for my media course portfolio page because this will be the first repsonsive site i've done.

i guess it's the same as anything templates, frameworks, resets: useful for those of us trying to keep up. maybe in in a few sites we'll just be doing the things ourselves

skeleton doesn't seem to bloated to me yet and it seems to have some pretty nifty coding ideas )e.g. a replacement for the -9999px so the browser doesn't need to 'draw' a box of that (negative) width.

 

[krymson]

IMO Ron is right, i dont think there is a need for "frameworks" for responsive design. It is real easy to learn and pick up. If you're using premade scripts you're never going to learn and retain that information. It's that learning process that ultimately separates you from the rest of the competition. It will be able to help you make turn around time faster. Just learn it...

 

[d a v e]

i disagree using this framework (and following a detailed video tut on how to set it up) means that i understand how it works and how to put modify it to my requirements - so it is just learning it...
for the first responsive site it seems a logical step to use - and understand - a framework. imo a framework that shows how to implement responsive design is no different (or rather, it's better) than reading how to do it in several places and assimilating several approaches or techniques and then attempting to do the same myself.

think of how we learn html/css in the first place. yes you can wade through the specs (in the same way we we learn vocabulary and grammar from dictionaries/school etc) but in the end it's by looking at sites and templates and picking them apart that we really understand (like reading lots of books)

like anything else (templates, frameworks, resets, lightboxes) they're tools: useful time-saving devices but ones that require an understanding of how they work to use them to make good work

 

[Roddy]

jQuery Mobile is the one I favor and have used for a few sites.

The problem is the time it takes trying to make it NOT look like all the other sites built using it.

At the end of the day - or the start of a new one - I did end up creating my own layouts. Once you get into using percentages they become addictive.

One of the problems with using frameworks like jQuery Mobile is in the details such as the way in which headings get chopped on narrower device widths. Its a lot easier to change the font size using media queries in your own style sheet that it is to actually find anything in the jQuery one!

One of the biggest challenges we face with responsive design is trying to find a way to test them in all the different devices and browsers. This may be a good reason to start out with a framework which has been thoroughly tested until some experience is gained as to what works - or more to the point - what doesn't.

It took me a while to realise that, just because I could easily make an image or a movie responsive, didn't mean that I should. Before you take on a responsive design with a lot of media content, make sure your client is aware of the different sizes and formats that each file has to available in and how much it will cost to do this.

Being involved in music production, I have spent probably too much time finding, adapting and customizing audio players to work on mobile devices. It took me longer to design this player to look like it was part of a jQuery Mobile site than it did to create the whole of the rest of the site!

 

[Phreaddee]

A bit from both camps actually.

but the ones that come with a "reset" that actually adds its own flavour to it rather than actually "resetting" (like initializr/bootstrap/et al) really piss me off because you go to design something, and your header sizes have weird margins, or the ul is padded in 40px.

far out, reset is reset, 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
I dont want to have to crawl through a reset to find oh look on line 298 they actually put extra padding on this one (and yes the comments said it was for consistency in ie6/7!-WTF?)

and secondly I like to make my own breakpoints, not some silly defined by someone else breakpoints (like mobile at >600, pfft!)

I think that they can be a good starting point for your first few projects that are responsive though, just don't ever rely on them 100%.

like training wheels on a bike, eventually you just want to rip those guys off and ride free!