03-flex-header-2: remove .left,.right selectors in solution.css & respective divs in .html

[rishikpogu]

Because

The previous solution included some changes in html (creating new divs & classes), which are now excluded in this solution and this helps in using flexbox a better way.

This PR

• will remove two divs with classes left, right from solution.html
• will remove .left, .right class selectors from solution.css
• will add margin-left: auto

Issue

Closes #XXXXX

Additional Information

Pull Request Requirements

• [x] I have thoroughly read and understand The Odin Project Contributing Guide
• [x] The title of this PR follows the location of change: brief description of change format, e.g. 01-flex-center: Update self check
• [x] The Because section summarizes the reason for this PR
• [x] The This PR section has a bullet point list describing the changes in this PR
• [ ] If this PR addresses an open issue, it is linked in the Issue section
• [x] If applicable, I have ensured that the TOP solution files match the Desired Outcome image

[MaoShizhong]

Thanks for opening this PR @rishikpogu.

I'm personally not convinced the current solution needs to be changed. I think it's sufficiently intuitive - you have items you want to group on the left side, and items to be grouped on the right, so you make a container for each and space-between them to either side. This is a fairly common way to do things, because often you will purposely want some elements to be grouped together, then have the groups moved. As opposed to just having all elements as individual items and just making the "left" and "right" items move to each side via the space in the middle (which means they might be on specific sides, but they're not actually grouped with things we might want them to be grouped with). And putting margin-left: auto on the button element selector wouldn't be sensible since that would affect every button (only one in this case, but it wouldn't be sensible to do that in an example solution specifically, in my opinion).

What you have does work though, and does meet the requirements of the task, so well done on this! Only saying for the PR specifically that the current solution I think suffices for the reasons shared above, so I'll close this as these changes won't be merged for it.