docs: correct the correction — absence of a .btn block does not imply the bump restyles

HistorianGateway has no local block AND no Bootstrap button call sites (all 15
buttons use the kit's .rail-btn chassis class), so the kit's .btn rule matches
nothing and bumping it changes nothing visible. My previous correction claimed the
opposite. Checking this needs two greps — declaration AND call sites — which come
apart exactly when an app doesn't use Bootstrap buttons.
This commit is contained in:
Joseph Doherty
2026-08-11 04:18:20 -04:00
parent dc6410dfad
commit baaf0a183c
3 changed files with 57 additions and 20 deletions
+13 -4
View File
@@ -88,10 +88,19 @@ Served at `_content/ZB.MOM.WW.Theme/…` by the ASP.NET static-web-asset pipelin
stylesheets; **trim the local copy when you bump to 0.4.0** — trim rather than delete, because a
local `.btn` may also carry app-specific *shape* declarations the kit does not ship.
**This is not universal — check before assuming your app already had it.** HistorianGateway has no
local `.btn` sizing at all, so for it the bump to 0.4.0+ is a **visible change** (buttons shrink from
Bootstrap's 1rem to `.85rem`) rather than a no-op cleanup. An earlier version of this note claimed
all five consumers carried the block; that was wrong.
**This is not universal, and checking it takes two greps, not one.** An earlier version of this note
claimed all five consumers carried the block. They do not — and the follow-up correction, that the
missing-block app would therefore be *restyled* by the bump, was also wrong.
| Question | Check |
|---|---|
| Does the app declare its own `.btn` sizing? | `grep bs-btn-font-size`, excluding `lib/bootstrap` |
| Does the app **use** Bootstrap buttons at all? | count `class="…"` values carrying a bare `btn` token |
HistorianGateway answers **no to both** — all 15 of its buttons use the kit's own `.rail-btn` chassis
class — so the kit's `.btn` rule matches nothing there and bumping it changes nothing visible. The
first question alone is misleading in both directions: "no local block" does **not** imply "the kit
now supplies sizing the app was missing."
Size buttons by overriding the `--bs-btn-*` variables, never by redeclaring box properties — the
`.btn-group` seam and radius machinery reads those variables, so a literal `font-size` at equal
specificity silently reduces `.btn-sm` to a padding-only difference.
@@ -8,12 +8,22 @@
OtOpcUa site.css, mxgw site.css and ScadaBridge — so it is upstreamed here in
0.4.0 and those local copies can be trimmed on bump.
NOT universal, despite an earlier claim in this comment that listed all five:
HistorianGateway has NO local .btn sizing in either its committed tree or its
sweep branch — only vendored bootstrap.min.css. So on 0.3.1 its buttons render
at Bootstrap's default 1rem, and its bump to 0.4.0+ is a VISIBLE change (buttons
shrink to .85rem), not the no-op cleanup it is for the others. Do not assume a
consumer already has this sizing; check before calling a bump cosmetic.
NOT universal, despite an earlier claim here that listed all five. Checking
whether a consumer carries this block needs TWO questions, and they come apart:
(1) does it declare its own .btn sizing? grep bs-btn-font-size (skip lib/bootstrap)
(2) does it USE Bootstrap buttons at all? count call sites carrying a bare
`btn` token in class="…"
HistorianGateway answers no to BOTH: it styles all 15 of its buttons with the
side-rail chassis class .rail-btn, so it had no block to carry AND the kit's
.btn rule matches nothing there. Bumping it changes NOTHING visible — the rule
is inert until call sites are converted to Bootstrap.
Question (1) alone gives the wrong answer in both directions. "No local block"
read as "the kit now supplies sizing it lacked" produced a confident warning
that its buttons would shrink; they would not, because nothing matches. Ask (2)
before telling anyone a bump restyles their UI.
Sized by CSS-variable override ONLY — never by redeclaring box properties.
Bootstrap's .btn-group seam and radius machinery reads these same variables,