...and make a little money on the go with the freemium model 😂 So altruistic.

All fixed! Everyone can signup now, hehe 😁

​@@FlorinPopquestion....is 24 hours all you get? I ask because I work, and it wouldn't be enough time for me😩

​@@jeymen It isn't. It's one big anti-pattern and breaks all good conventions when it comes to DRY (don't repeat yourself), and having reviewed thousands of portfolios and job applicants (including for FAANG companies), I've noticed a trend: 1. Tailwind-lovers tend to not understand CSS. "But it maps to CSS 1:1!!" you might say, sure. Then since I know fuel goes boom, rocket goes weeeeee, now I'm a rocket scientist? TW-lovers don't know CSS, otherwise they would use CSS. 2. Tailwind-lovers tend to spam `div` and not much else far more often than others. 3. Tailwind-lovers tend to not know or understand accessibility and why it matters. 4. Tailwind-lovers tend to also be good software developers, but for some reason are perfectly fine spamming 20+ or even 40+ utility classes onto a SINGLE line of code. Great way to confuse git when you change one utility class. 5. You forego specificity and the "C" part of CSS entirely. 6. You have to use weird-as-hell syntax for grouped pseudo selectors (like :hover). And there's so much more. Tailwind is used by people because they don't understand CSS, and then they claim "but it's practically CSS", not knowing that... they really don't know what they're talking about.

Yes but general tutorials should be basic css. It should translate to tailwind seamlessly

​@@shahaed To be fair, translating from tailwind to css is just as easy as translating from css to tailwind.

@@parkourbee2 the point is learning how to do it in pure css is much more valuable in terms of learning. Development and efficiency wise, then you can use tailwind and others. But if you’re trying to learn, pure css is the way to go.

@@parkourbee2 doesn’t make sense to learn tailwind first since it’s a subset of css. Plus there’s many properties not available in tailwind and using arbitrary values would be confusing in a video like this if you didn’t understand that actually css

Would love to see better browser support for subgrid

Yup. I think this a good example of how to over-complicate a straightforward column layout. I think KP should go this again and leave his grid shoes at the door.

He did say at the beginning he’s been wanting to play with subgrid. Of course it could have been done several different ways but choosing to use grid was a direct result of wanting to work with subgrid.

You could use transform:translate to move the lower card up over the upper one yes.

Thank you, I'll try it when I am on my laptop.❤

Any unit will grow when the page is zoomed in, other than viewport units, and to me, that's a bigger problem

Yes, you can just create two boxes (divs), then slide the 2nd box up on top using translate. Give the 2nd box a negative margin bottom to bring up the space left below.

THANK YOU! I thought I was losing my mind. I was following along and got stuck at 11:15 because my code below (using subgrid) wasn't working: .welcome { background: lightblue; grid-column: 1 / -1; grid-row: 1 / 3; display: grid; grid-template-rows: subgrid; grid-template-columns: subgrid; }

@@arturosan007 never mind bro, you can always check if your browser support this feature or not by in 2 ways 1- in CSS use @support( prop : value ) 2- can I use website

Was going to say I'm waiting for better browser support, but with it in the lastest version of Safari I guess it is time 🙂

@@KevinPowell Just checked caniuse, and FF115 has support behind a flag supposedly as well! :)

Just preference and being more specific, no real benefit compared to the examples you gave

You could just leave out the I guess... not sure why you'd want to do that though!

I'd much rather a pseudo element than an empty div, of you want to go that route. If it's a one-off for fun, it doesn't matter obviously, but if I was going to have a card like this on a site, using an empty div becomes a pattern you'd very quickly regret.

@@KevinPowell I can add a class name as "blank-empty" and attributes as aria-hidden='true', data-status='important!' to the empty div. Will it cover up all the downfalls of using empty divs in HTML body?

@@KevinPowell I was following along with a codesandbox but I got stuck at 11:15 because my code didn't achieve the same results/behavior as yours. I'm using Edge as my browser to code within codesandbox. Could that be why it wasn't working? .welcome { background: lightblue; grid-column: 1 / -1; grid-row: 1 / 3; display: grid; grid-template-rows: subgrid; grid-template-columns: subgrid; }

​@@arturosan007some things in this code are not supported by Edge, you will have more luck viewing the site in chrome.

How did you know? 🤣🤣🤣

someone should take this up with the ai overlords

-Atom One Dark- Edit: I use that in VS Code... This has it's own editor and I have no idea what it is, lol

​@@KevinPowelllooks like cobalt 2

They should all be there. Which ones are you looking for?

@@KevinPowell the one with hover box shadow trick from tobiasahlin, and a front end challenge with the bank card

Oh no 😅

What's wrong with subgrid? Chrome just announced intent to ship, and it's already in FF and Safari

​@@KevinPowell it's enough to start experimenting with it but not using it on a production site yet

granted, this might not have been the simplest solution to the problem, but if this already puts you off, then you will probably never make it thru coding a full blown website with literally hundreds of these "simple little designs" that all need to fit together to not blow up. Plus coding interactivity and form handling. That's also what separates pixel pushers and print design from screen and interaction design.

Don’t worry about it. The reason you’re feeling so discouraged is because this example was so overkill and unnecessary. To make things overlap you can just add padding to the bottom of the top box and negative margin to the top of the bottom box. It’s that simple