Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Opinionated: reintroduce cursor:pointer #25082

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 28, 2017
Merged

Opinionated: reintroduce cursor:pointer #25082

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 28, 2017

Conversation

patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member

@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke commented Dec 25, 2017

Explicitly re-adds the "hand" cursor:pointer for non-disabled .btn, .close, .navbar-toggler elements, as well as forcing page-link pagination controls to always have the "hand" cursor (even if an author uses it on, say, <button> elements for a dynamically updating in-page pagination).

Controversial, as everybody jumped on the bandwagon following this article https://medium.com/simple-human/buttons-shouldnt-have-a-hand-cursor-b11e99ca374b - which does have its merits of course, but there are also counter-arguments like http://kizu.ru/en/issues/cursor-pointer/

And seeing the amount of issues we've seen following the change, and the potential complexity needed to consistently address the cursor issue (see #24156 where i explore how the cursor needs to be based on "intent", and how that's tough to determine), I'm favouring an opinionated take here of just reintroducing the cursor:pointer.

Closes #24954, closes #24156, and closes #23224.

Explicitly re-adds the "hand" `cursor:pointer` for non-disabled `.btn`, `.close`, `.navbar-toggler` elements, as well as forcing `page-link` pagination controls to always have the "hand" cursor (even if an author uses it on, say, `<button>` elements for a dynamically updating in-page pagination).

Controversial, as everybody jumped on the bandwagon following this article https://medium.com/simple-human/buttons-shouldnt-have-a-hand-cursor-b11e99ca374b - which does have its merits of course, but there are also counter-arguments like http://kizu.ru/en/issues/cursor-pointer/

And seeing the amount of issues we've seen following the change, and the potential complexity needed to consistently address the cursor issue (see #24156 where i explore how the cursor needs to be based on "intent", and how that's tough to determine), I'm favouring an opinionated take here of just reintroducing the `cursor:pointer`.
@XhmikosR
Copy link
Member

Please fix the linting issues.

Other than that, I'm personally in favor of this, mostly because I'm used to it.

@patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah, linting issue slipped me by. Fixed now :)

@mdo mdo merged commit e3f9c46 into twbs:v4-dev Dec 28, 2017
@patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member Author

cheers boss @mdo

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 15, 2018

In Bootsrap 4.1 still doesn't work? Any change?

@Herst Herst mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants