Hi Nicole! Thanks so much for your quick and helpful reply, I really
appreciate it. :)
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Nicole Chung <
nicole...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm taking it right from this article
Oh, nice! I had not seen this article before. Thank you for the
linkage, reading now.
> another way to write it is this:
>
> h1,.alpha { [font styles] }
> h2,.beta { [font styles] }
> h3,.gamma { [font styles] }
> h4,.delta { [font styles] }
> h5,.epsilon { [font styles] }
> h6,.zeta { [font styles] }
Awesome, that is more understandable.
In fact, based on Nocole's article (the one I linked to in my first
post) I played around with this naming convention:
"Jim Blower's Extended System of Units"
.lunto {}
.mikto {}
.nekto {}
.otro {}
.pekro {}
.quekto {}
.rimto {}
.sotro {}
.trekto {}
.unto {}
.vunkto {}
.wekto {}
.xonto {}
.yocto {}
.zepto {}
.atto {}
.femto {}
.pico {}
.nano {}
.micro {}
.milli {}
.centi {}
.deci {}
.deka {}
.hecto {}
.kilo {}
.mega {}
.giga {}
.tera {}
.peta {}
.exa {}
.zetta {}
.yotta {}
.xona {}
.weka {}
.vunda {}
.uda {}
.treda {}
.sorta {}
.rinta {}
.quexa {}
.pepta {}
.ocha {}
.nena {}
.minga {}
.luma {}
--
rgne.ws/PqkGvg
But, at least from what I have experienced so far, the major drawback
to the above naming system/convention is that it is hard to remember.
:(
> In which case you can use it like this:
> ... <snip> ...
> I find this method a tiny bit easier to conceptualize.
Definitely! Thank you so much for the clarification, I really appreciate it. :)
Based on the little testing I've done so far, I think I might go with
the .h1, .h2, .h3, .h4, .h5, .h6 classes, just because I feel like
that's something that I can remember.
Would you think it was crazy to have .h7, .h8, .h9 classes? Or, would
it make sense to just "extend" existing classes and call the new
headings something like ".category" (I think that was what Nicole's
article was hinting at)?
Thanks again! Much appreciated.
Cheers,
Micky