article mobile bits #451
article mobile bits #451
Conversation
| @media only screen and (max-width: 640px) { | ||
| article .footer-comtainer { | ||
| flex-direction: row; | ||
| flex-wrap: wrap; | ||
| } | ||
| article .footer-comtainer > div:nth-child(-n + 2) { | ||
| flex: 1 1; | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A couple small typos
| @media only screen and (max-width: 640px) { | |
| article .footer-comtainer { | |
| flex-direction: row; | |
| flex-wrap: wrap; | |
| } | |
| article .footer-comtainer > div:nth-child(-n + 2) { | |
| flex: 1 1; | |
| } | |
| } | |
| @media only screen and (max-width: 640px) { | |
| article .footer-container { | |
| flex-direction: row; | |
| flex-wrap: wrap; | |
| } | |
| article .footer-container > div:nth-child(-n + 2) { | |
| flex: 1 1; | |
| } | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jrhender I noticed the typo as well.. but it's everywhere, not just in my additions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah I see. Better to keep as is then and fix in another PR I suppose.
| flex-direction: row; | ||
| flex-wrap: wrap; | ||
| } | ||
| article .footer-comtainer > div:nth-child(-n + 2) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it a good practice to use div:nth-child as used? Perhaps an additional class would be clearer when reading the code and less likely to break unexpectedly? I don't have a strong feeling here, just thought I would ask.
| article .footer-comtainer > div:nth-child(-n + 2) { | |
| article .footer-comtainer .footer-section { |
My CSS knowledge is limited, so my apologies if the rationale for the current approach is obvious 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Both options are fine by me. @mruwnik do you prefer nth-child or a new class?
|
All looks good to me, let's wait on a final decision re "div:nth-child" before merging |
No description provided.