Are you guys affiliated with https://en.bem.info/ and why the stark difference?

[woodysee]

I was doing some reading up on implementing BEM for my SASS modules and have suddenly noticed that there is an alternative BEM standard named "bem.info" that contradicts the standard set by "Get BEM".

Both standards are also different. For example, "Get BEM" requires modifiers to be separated from blocks and elements with double dashes (i.e.naming__cell--modifier--small) while "bem.info" requires modifiers to be separated using a single underscore (i.e. naming__cell modifier_small).

I have first learnt about BEM from this site. So the emergence of a different and competing standard has presented a dilemma on which source of truth for the BEM methodology I should follow.

Both "Get BEM" and "bem.info" has stated that they at least both done work with Yandex at some point. They even both have the same logo.

So I am wondering if there is any affiliation between "Get BEM" and "bem.info"? And why are two different standards being set on both sites? Which standard of BEM I should use?

[maybephilipp]

I just found this issue: bem-site/bem-method#775
I think we can treat this style guide like alternative naming convention.
Also bem.info is more developed method. There are also conventions for Javascript and other areas, libraries and tools.
As I see, getbem has only CSS naming convention.

PS. I like getbem more, it seems more convenient to me.

[maybephilipp]

Also: #8

There are description and discussion why getbem devs decided to create their own website. And seems I agree with them.