Bertrand, I know that your role is to avoid unecessary questioning about Orchard.
You are amongst the few founders of Orchard and this give you vision, credibility and authority, I voted for you for comittee.
Your answer covers various aspects:
1) my own work
2) my question
Concerning my question, I simply asked who is using Orchard, kind of status of theming practice in Orchard.
Next point in this question is the actual structure of Orchard css rule, or should I say non structure or inadapted structure.
Concerning taking Bootstrap as a standard, I agree with you, this could be a 'limiting' decision, this has to be evaluated, but, look, I remember the time people were asking should we adopt jquery...
And to evaluate a Library or component, the level of adoption is a key point.
Concerning 1), this is not the subject of my thread, we could change it...
My first move was to use an existing bootstrap orchard theme (orchard bootstrap, good work) but after 1 week on it I realized that 80% of the 'internal' views has to be replicated in the theme and rewritten to work, then that 50 of Orchard features were not working, with these patches, and need further rewritting.
Further the BS theme I was implementing internal code for layouts, I decided to migrate and adapt this in a dedicated module, then I created more code and each time realizing, when imbricating my code with traditionnal Orchard features as projections, rules, widgets, layout, that the Orchard css generated was not very adapted to a global integration: many classes are targetting only local module, different approach of css areas management are adopted in each module.
This is a constat for the internal shapes and templates from Core or Framework, from Orchard.xxx modules and each author of a module creates it own logic....
This is normal the documentation
gives very few guidelines for css, kind of respective anarchy.
My idea is more could we envisage a lifting on css concept for 1.7 or 1.7 following version.