In early 2013, the “Block Element Modifier” (BEM) css syntax emerged as a popular way to create better organization and uniformity across projects. For the most part, I love it. It’s clear, organized, and it makes sense. But one thing that kept bugging me (and my fellow FEDs) was how redundant and long some of the class attributes on elements were getting—especially when it came to modifiers.

<button class="button button--green button--rounded button--large">

Individual Modifiers: A shorter syntax

I really like the element--modifier notation visually. It makes it clear that the class is only meant to extend something. But repeating the element name each time is redundant. We could remove that redundancy and keep them visually distinct by attaching the modifiers directly to their element in our stylesheet, while keeping a leading hyphen on the class name to denote its “modifier”.

HTML

<button class="button -green -rounded -large">

SCSS

.button { &.-green {...} &.-rounded {...} &.-large {...} }

This maintains the clear distinction between elements and modifiers, without the need to repeat yourself—and yes, a single leading hyphen IS a valid character for the start of a selector (double hyphens are not). If multiple selectors make you uneasy, you’re probably having IE 6 flashbacks. Don’t worry. She can’t hurt you anymore.

Another concern may arise over the added specificity. I haven’t found it to be an issue, but can imagine a scenario where you had a set of global overrides you want to be able to add to any element. In that case, you could do something like this:

SCSS

.button { &.-hoverable { &:hover { opacity: 0.75; } } } .overrides { &.-disabled { opacity: 0.25; } }

HTML

<button class="button -hoverable overrides -disabled">Disabled</button>

The example is contrived, but you get the point. If you hover over the button the opacity does not change, because the .button.-hoverable class has been trumped the later defined and equally specific .overrides.-disabled selector.

Saved Variations: Extending with SASS

The flexibility of using modifiers in our markup is great, but if I notice a commonly reoccurring combination, I prefer to combine them in my stylesheet instead. SASS @extend lets us do this.

SCSS

.button--save { @extend %button; @extend %button--large; @extend %button--rounded; @extend %button--green; }

HTML

<button class="button--save">Save</button>

So clean! You’ll notice a couple of things here. 1) I’m using the SASS % placeholder selector, and 2) I’m still using the normal BEM element--modifier syntax.

First, I create all of my styles using placeholder selectors, so I can @extend them into other classes later.

%button { background: #45beff; border: none; padding: 1em 2em; font-size: 16px; &:hover { opacity: 0.75; } } %button--green { background: #3efa95; } %button--red { background: #ff3a6a; } %button--large { font-size:20px; } %button--rounded { border-radius: 10px; }

Now I can assemble my element styles, expose any modifiers I plan on using in the markup, and create reusable variations that extend from various combinations of modifiers.

.button { @extend %button; &.-green { @extend %button--green; } &.-large { @extend %button--large; } } .button--delete { @extend %button; @extend %button--large; @extend %button--rounded; @extend %button--red; }

See it on CodePen.

BEM to BEVM?

When all’s said and done, the BEM block__element--modifer pattern has morphed into something more like block__element--variation -modifier, plus internal SASS %modifier selectors.

// Internal Modifier %button--red { background: #ff3a6a; } // Element .button { // Modifier &.-red { @extend %button--red; } } // Variation .button--delete { @extend %button; @extend %button--red; }

I’m enjoying it so far, but what do you think? Useful? Weird? Discuss!