When I published MaintainableCSS, I decided to talk about semantic class names in comparison to non-semantic class names. This is because it’s often easier to deduce what we should do once we know what we shouldn’t.
In response, atomic CSS advocates critiqued semantic class names. While this got me thinking, my mind remains largely unchanged.
Here I’ll explain why that is and address some of the common opinions directly.
# 1. “Semantic is a misleading word”
In Understanding Semantics, Léonie Watson says that semantic means:
“of code intended to reflect structure and meaning.”
This is why “wrapper” is
See original post