Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The first alpha version of Bootstrap 4 was released on August 19, 2015. [16] The first beta version was released on August 10, 2017. [17] Otto suspended work on Bootstrap 3 on September 6, 2016, to free up time to work on Bootstrap 4. Bootstrap 4 was finalized on January 18, 2018. [18] Significant changes include: Major rewrite of the code
From the late 2000s onward, the intensive use of the Web by mobile agents motivated "liquid layouts" and responsive elements for the growing variety of screen sizes. [5] In the 2010s, the intensive use of popular JavaScript layout frameworks, such as Bootstrap, inspired CSS flex-box and grid layout specifications. [6]
Font Awesome 5 was released on December 7, 2017, with 1,278 icons. [7] Version 5 comes in two packages: Font Awesome Free and the proprietary Font Awesome Pro (available for $99 a year). The free versions (all releases up to 4 and the free version for 5 and 6) are available under the SIL Open Font License 1.1, Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 ...
Bootstrap Studio was launched on October 19, 2015 with a post on Product Hunt where it reached number 4 in the Product of the Day category. [5] Version 2.0 of the software was released on January 22, 2016 and brought JavaScript editing, multi-page support and improved the CSS support. [6] Version 4.0 was launched on November 1, 2017.
On 28 October 2014, HTML5 was released as a W3C Recommendation, [32] bringing the specification process to completion. [5] On 1 November 2016, HTML 5.1 was released as a W3C Recommendation. [33] On 14 December 2017, HTML 5.2 was released as a W3C Recommendation. [34]
There are four weeks left before the conference championship games, meaning we are inching closer to finding out who will be in the first 12-team College Football Playoff.
Neither the United States nor China would win a trade war, the Chinese Embassy in Washington said on Monday, after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump threatened to slap an additional 10% tariff on ...
More teams with more arguments — almost all of them flawed, not to mention citing different criteria — have sparked a new wave of public “discourse.”