Web Standards

“Never, ever hire for JavaScript framework skills. Instead, interview and hire only for fundamentals like web standards, accessibility, modern CSS, semantic HTML, and Web Components.” — Alex Russell

Quick Hit #16 originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Almost missed that the WP Twenty Twenty-Five theme was approved a couple weeks ago.

Quick Hit #15 originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Inclusive Design 24 is in 8 short days — and it’s FREE, no sign-up required!

Quick Hit #14 originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

I sure do love little reminders about HTML semantics, particularly semantics that are tougher to commit to memory. Scott has a great one, beginning with this markup:

<p>I am a paragraph.</p> <span>I am also a paragraph.</span> <div>You might hate it, but I'm a paragraph too.</div> <ul> <li>Even I am a paragraph.</li> <li>Though I'm a list item as well.</li> </ul> <p>I might trick you</p> <address>Guess who? A paragraph!</address>

You may look at that markup and say “Hey! You can’t fool me, only the <p> elements are “real” paragraphs!

You might even call out such elements as divs or spans being used as “paragraphs” a WCAG failure.

But, if you’re thinking those sorts of things, then maybe you’re not aware that those are actually all “paragraphs”.

It’s easy to forget this since many of those non-paragraph elements are not allowed in between paragraph tags and it usually gets all sorted out anyway when HTML is parsed.

The accessibility bits are what I always come to Scott’s writing for:

Those examples I provided at the start of this post? macOS VoiceOver, NVDA and JAWS treat them all as paragraphs ([asterisks] for NVDA, read on…). […] The point being that screen readers are in step with HTML, and understand that “paragraphs” are more than just the p element.

Paragraphs originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Didya see that Tumblr is getting a WordPress makeover? And it’s not a trivial move:

This won’t be easy. Tumblr hosts over half a billion blogs. We’re talking about one of the largest technical migrations in internet history. Some people think it’s impossible. But we say, “challenge accepted.”

Half a billion blogs. Considering that WordPress already powers somewhere around 40% of all websites (which is much, much higher than 500m) this’ll certainly push that figure even further.

I’m sure there’s at least one suspicious nose out there catching whiffs of marketing smoke though I’m amicable to the possibility that this is a genuine move to enhance a beloved platform that’s largely seen as a past relic of the Flickr era. I loved Tumblr back then. It really embraced the whole idea that a blog can help facilitate better writing with a variety of post formats. (Post formats, fwiw, are something I always wished would be a WordPress first-class citizen but they never made it out of being an opt-in theme feature). Tumblr was the first time I was able to see blogging as more than a linear chain of content organized in reverse chronological order. Blog posts are more about what you write and how you write it than they are when they’re written.

Anyway, I know jobs are a scarce commodity in tech these days and Auttomatic is looking for folks to help with the migration.

I was about to say this “could” be a neat opportunity, but nay, it’s a super interesting and exciting opportunity, one where your work is touching two of the most influential blogging platforms on the planet. I remember interviewing Alex Hollender and Jon Robson after they shipped a design update to Wikipedia and thinking how much fun and learning would come out of a project like that. This has that same vibe to me. Buuuut, make no illusions about it: it’ll be tough.

Shipping Tumblr and WordPress originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

I created a little library at work to make those “skeleton screens” that I’m not sure anyone likes. […] We named it skellyCSS because… skeletons and CSS, I guess. We still aren’t even really using it very much, but it was fun to do and it was the first node package I made myself (for the most part).

Regardless of whether or not anyone “likes” skeleton screens, they do come up and have their use cases. And they’re probably not something you want to rebuild time and again. Great use for a web component, I’d say! Maybe Ryan can get Uncle Dave to add it to his Awesome Standalones list. &#x1f609;

The other reason I’m sharing this link is that Ryan draws attention to the Web Components De-Mystified course that Scott Jehl recently published, something worth checking out of course, but that I needed a reminder for myself.

Introducing <skelly-wc> originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

AVIF (AV1 Image File Format) is a modern image file format specification for storing images that offer a much more significant file reduction when compared to other formats like JPG, JPEG, PNG, and WebP. Version 1.0.0 of the AVIF specification was finalized in February 2019 and released by Alliance for Open Media to the public.

You save 50% of your file size when compared to JPG and 20% compared to WebP while still maintaining the image quality.

In this article, you will learn about some browser-based tools and command-line tools for creating AVIF images.

Why use AVIF over JPGs, PNGS, WebP, and GIF?

• Lossless compression and lossy compression
• JPEG suffers from awful banding
• WebP is much better, but there’s still noticeable blockiness compared to the AVIF
• Multiple color space
• 8, 10, 12-bit color depth

Caveats

Jake Archibald, wrote an article a few years back on this new image format and also helped us to identify some disadvantages to compressing images, normally you should look out for these two when compressing to AVIF:

1. If a user looks at the image in the context of the page, and it strikes them as ugly due to compression, then that level of compression is not acceptable. But, one tiny notch above that boundary is fine.
2. It’s okay for the image to lose noticeable detail compared to the original unless that detail is significant to the context of the image.

See also: Addy Osmani at Smashing Magazine goes in-depth on using AVIF and WebP.

Browser Solutions Squoosh Screenshot of Squoosh.

Squoosh is a popular image compression web app that allows you to convert images in numerous formats to other widely used compressed formats, including AVIF.

Features

• File-size limit: 4MB
• Image optimization settings (located on the right side)
• Download controls – this includes seeing the size of the resulting file and the percentage reduction from the original image
• Free to use

Cloudinary

Cloudinary’s free image-to-AVIF converter is another image tool that doesn’t require any form of code. All you need to do is upload your selected images (PNG, JPG, GIF, etc.) and it returns compressed versions of them. Its API even has more features besides creating AVIF images like its image enhancement and artificially generating filling for images.

I’m pretty sure you’re here because you’re looking for a free and fast converter. So, the browser solution should do.

Features

• No stated file size limit
• Free to use

You can find answers to common questions in the Cloudinary AVIF converter FAQ.

Command Line Solutions avif-cli

avif-cli by lovell lets you take your images (PNG, JPEG, etc.) stored in a folder and converts them to AVIF images of your specified reduction size.

Here are the requirements and what you need to do:

• Node.js 12.13.0+

Install the package:

npm install avif

Run the command in your terminal:

npx avif --input="./imgs/*" --output="./output/" --verbose

• ./imgs/* – represents the location of all your image files
• ./output/ – represents the location of your output folder

CodePen Embed Fallback Features

• Free to use
• Speed of conversion can be set

You can find out about more commands via the avif-cli GitHub page.

sharp

sharp is another useful tool for converting large images in common formats to smaller, web-friendly AVIF images.

Here are the requirements and what you need to do:

• Node.js 12.13.0+

Install the package:

npm install sharp

Create a JavaScript file named sharp-example.js and copy this code:

const sharp = require('sharp') const convertToAVIF = () => { sharp('path_to_image') .toFormat('avif', {palette: true}) .toFile(__dirname + 'path_to_output_image') } convertToAVIF()

Where path_to_image represents the path to your image with its name and extension, i.e.:

./imgs/example.jpg

And path_to_output_image represents the path you want your image to be stored with its name and new extension, i.e.:

/sharp-compressed/compressed-example.avif

Run the command in your terminal:

node sharp-example.js

And there! You should have a compressed AVIF file in your output location!

Features

• Free to use
• Images can be rotated, blurred, resized, cropped, scaled, and more using sharp

See also: Stanley Ulili’s article on How To Process Images in Node.js With Sharp.

Conclusion

AVIF is a technology that front-end developers should consider for their projects. These tools allow you to convert your existing JPEG and PNG images to AVIF format. But as with adopting any new tool in your workflow, the benefits and downsides will need to be properly evaluated in accordance with your particular use case.

I hope you enjoyed reading this article as much as I enjoyed writing it. Thank you so much for your time and I hope you have a great day ahead!

Useful Tools for Creating AVIF Images originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

I often use surfing as a metaphor for new technology. Go too early and you don't catch the wave. Go too late and you don't catch it either. Similarly next generation hardware or software may be too early for its time. I found myself wondering if this was the case for Google Glass and AI.

For those who don't remember, Google Glass was an early augmented reality headset that despite early excitement was ultimately shuttered. I spent time with the developer version of Google Glass in 2013 and, while promising, didn't think it was ready. But the technical capabilities of the device were impressive especially for its time. Glass featured:

• a camera for taking photos and video
• a microphone for accepting voice commands
• a speaker for audio input only you could hear (bone conduction)
• a mini projector to display information and interface controls in the corner of your field of vision
• a trackpad for controlling the interface and voice commands
• a number of sensors for capturing and reacting to device movement, like head gestures
• WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity

What Google Glass didn't have is AI. That is, vision and language models that can parse and react to audio and video from the real World. As I illustrated in a look at early examples of multi-modal personal assistants: faced with a rat's nest of signs, you want to know if it's ok to park your car. A multi-modal assistant could take an image (live camera feed or still photo), a voice command (in natural language), and possibly some additional context (time, location, historical data) as input and assemble a response (or action) that considers all these factors.

Google Glass had a lot of the technical capabilities (except for processing power) to make this possible in a lightweight form factor. Maybe it just missed the AI wave.

Developers suffer in the great multitudes whom their sacred block-based websites cannot reach.

Johannes Gutenberg (probably)

Long time WordPresser, first time Gutenberger here. I’m a fan even though I’m still anchored to a classic/block hybrid setup. I believe Johanes himself would be, too, trading feather pens for blocks. He was a forward-thinking 15th-century inventor, after all.

My enthusiasm for Gutenberg-ness is curbed at the theming level. I’ll sling blocks all day long in the Block Editor, but please, oh please, let me keep my classic PHP templates and the Template Hierarchy that comes with it. The separation between theming and editing is one I cherish. It’s not that the Site Editor and its full-site editing capabilities scare me. It’s more that I fail to see the architectural connection between the Site and Block Editors. There’s a connection for sure, so the failure of not understanding it is more on me than WordPress.

The WP Minute published a guide that clearly — and succinctly — describes the relationships between WordPress blocks, patterns, and templates. There are plenty of other places that do the same, but this guide is organized nicely in that it starts with the blocks as the lowest-level common denominator, then builds on top of it to show how patterns are comprised of blocks used for content layout, synced patterns are the same but are one of many that are edited together, and templates are full page layouts cobbled from different patterns and a sprinkle of other “theme blocks” that are the equivalent of global components in a design system, say a main nav or a post loop.

The guide outlines it much better, of course:

1. Gutenberg Blocks: The smallest unit of content
2. Patterns: Collections of blocks for reuse across your site
3. Synced Patterns: Creating “master patterns” for site-wide updates
4. Synced Pattern Overrides: Locking patterns while allowing specific edits
5. Templates: The structural framework of your WordPress site

That “overrides” enhancement to the synced patterns feature is new to me. I’m familiar with synced patterns (with a giant nod to Ganesh Dahal) but must’ve missed that in the WordPress 6.6 release earlier this summer.

I’m not sure when or if I’ll ever go with a truly modern WordPress full-site editing setup wholesale, out-of-the-box. I don’t feel pressured to, and I believe WordPress doesn’t care one way or another. WordPress’s ultimate selling point has always been its flexibility (driven, of course, by the massive and supportive open-source community behind it). It’s still the “right” tool for many types of projects and likely will remain so as long as it maintains its support for classic, block, and hybrid architectures.

Understanding Gutenberg Blocks, Patterns, and Templates originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Happy birthday, Chris Coyier — and thank you for CSS-Tricks as well as everything you do at CodePen, ShopTalk, Boost, and even your personal blog!

Quick Hit #13 originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Giant kudos to Scott Jehl on releasing his new Web Components De-Mystified online course! Eight full hours of training from one of the best in the business.

Quick Hit #12 originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Eric gifting us with his research on all the various things that anchors (not links) do when they are in :focus.

Turns out, there’s a lot!

That’s an understatement! This is an incredible amount of work, even if Eric calls it “dry as a toast sandwich.” Boring ain’t always a bad thing. Let me simply drop in a pen that Dave put together pulling all of Eric’s findings into a table organized to compare the different behaviors between operating systems — and additional tables for each specific platform — because I think it helps frame Eric’s points.

CodePen Embed Fallback

That really is a lot! But why on Earth go through the trouble of documenting all of this?

All of the previously documented behavior needs to be built in JavaScript, since we need to go the synthetic link route. It also means that it is code we need to set aside time and resources to maintain.

That also assumes that is even possible to recreate every expected feature in JavaScript, which is not true. It also leaves out the mental gymnastics required to make a business case for prioritizing engineering efforts to re-make each feature.

There’s the rub! These are the behaviors you’re gonna need to mimic and maintain if veering away from semantic, native web elements. So what Eric is generously providing is perhaps an ultimate argument against adopting frameworks — or rolling some custom system — that purposely abstract the accessible parts of the web, often in favor of DX.

As with anything, there’s more than meets the eye to all this. Eric’s got an exhaustive list at the end there that calls out all the various limitations of his research. Most of those notes sound to me like there are many, many other platforms, edge cases, user agent variations, assistive technologies, and considerations that could also be taken into account, meaning we could be responsible for a much longer list of behaviors than what’s already there.

And yes, this sweatshirt is incredible. Indeed.

Basic keyboard shortcut support for focused links originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

A gem from Chris Ferdinandi that details how to use custom events to hook into Web Components. More importantly, Chris dutifully explains why custom events are a better fit than, say, callback functions.

With a typical JavaScript library, you pass callbacks in as part of the instantiate process. […] Because Web Components self-instantiate, though, there’s no easy way to do that.

There’s a way to use callback functions, just not an “easy” way to go about it.

JavaScript provides developers with a way to emit custom events that developers can listen for with the Element.addEventListener() method.

We can use custom events to let developers hook into the code that we write and run more code in response to when things happen. They provide a really flexible way to extend the functionality of a library or code base.

Don’t miss the nugget about canceling custom events!

Callbacks on Web Components? originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

Hey look at that, the State of CSS Survey for 2024 is open and taking submissions.

Quick Hit #11 originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

You ever find yourself in bumper-to-bumper traffic? I did this morning on the way to work (read: whatever cafe I fancy). There’s a pattern to it, right? Stop, go, stop, go, stop… it’s almost rhythmic and harmonious in the most annoying of ways. Everyone in line follows the dance, led by some car upfront, each subsequent vehicle pressed right up to the rear of the next for the luxury of moving a few feet further before the next step.

Photo by Jakob Jin

Have you tried breaking the pattern? Instead of playing shadow to the car in front of me this morning, I allowed space between us. I’d gradually raise my right foot off the brake pedal and depress the gas pedal only once my neighboring car gained a little momentum. At that point, my car begins to crawl. And continue crawling. I rarely had to tap the brakes at all once I got going. In effect, I had sacrificed proximity for a smoother ride. I may not be traveling the “fastest” in line, but I was certainly gliding along with a lot less friction.

I find that many things in life are like that. Getting closest to anything comes with a cost, be it financial or consequence. Want the VIP ticket to a concert you’re stoked as heck about? Pony up some extra cash. Want the full story rather than a headline? Just enter your email address. Want up-to-the-second information in your stock ticker? Hand over some account information. Want access to all of today’s televised baseball games? Pick up an ESPN+ subscription.

Proximity and speed are the commodities, the products so to speak. Closer and faster are what’s being sold.

You may have run into the “law of diminishing returns” in some intro-level economics class you took in high school or college. It’s the basis for a large swath of economic theory but in essence, is the “too much of a good thing” principle. It’s what AMPM commercials have been preaching this whole time.

I’m embedding the clip instead of linking it up because it clearly illustrates the “problem” of having too many of what you want (or need). Dude resorted to asking two teens to reach into his front pocket for his wallet because his hands were full, creeper. But buy on, the commercial says, because the implication is that there’s never too much of a good thing, even if it ends in a not-so-great situation chockfull of friction.

The only and only thing I took away from physics in college — besides gravity force being 9.8 m/s2 — is that there’s no way to have bigger, cheaper, and faster at the same time. You can take two, but all three cannot play together. For example, you can have a spaceship that’s faster and cheaper, but chances are that it ain’t gonna be bigger than a typical spaceship. If you were to aim for bigger, it’d be a lot less cheap, not only for the extra size but also to make the dang heavy thing go as fast as possible. It’s a good rule in life. I don’t have proof of it, but I’d wager Mick Jagger lives by it, or at least did at one time.

Speed. Proximity. Faster and slower. Closer and further. I’m not going to draw any parallels to web development, UX design, or any other front-end thing. They’re already there.

The Intersection of Speed and Proximity originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

A client asked if we could mimic the “rubber band” scrolling behavior on many mobile devices. I’m sure you know what I’m talking about. It’s a behavior that already exists and happens automatically in most browsers. In iOS Safari, for example, you’re allowed to scroll beyond the top or bottom edge of the viewport by a few hundred pixels, and letting go snaps the page back in place.

I had heard of some instances where someone might want to prevent the bounce from happening but no one had asked me to implement it, especially in a way that supports devices without a touch interface. I was actually a bit surprised there isn’t an existing CSS property for this. There’s the non-standard -webkit-overflow-scrolling property but that’s for a different type of “momentum” scrolling. Nor would I want to rely on a non-standard property that’s not on track to become part of the specifications.

OK, so what if we want to force this sort of rubber banding in our work? For starters, we’d need some sort of element acting as a container for content that requires scrolling. From there, we could reach for JavaScript, of course, but that involves adding scroll listeners or a combination of pointerDown, pointerUp, and pointerMove events, not to mention keeping track of positions, inertial movement, etc.

A CSS-only solution would be much more ideal.

Here is a container with a few child elements:

<div class="carousel"> <div class="slides"> <div class="slide">1</div> <div class="slide">2</div> <div class="slide">3</div> <div class="slide">4</div> <div class="slide">5</div> </div> </div>

Let’s get some baseline styles in place, specifically to create a situation where we’re guaranteed to overflow a parent container.

/* Parent container with fixed dimensions for overflow */ .carousel { width: 200px; height: 400px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: auto; } /* Wrapper for slides, stacked in a column */ .slides { display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-wrap: wrap; width: 100%; height: fit-content; } /* Each slide is the full width of the carousel */ .slide { width: 100%; aspect-ratio: 1; }

Let’s start by adding some vertical margins. If your container has only one long item, add it to the top and bottom of the child element. If the container has multiple children, you’ll want to add margin to the top of the first child element and the bottom of the last child element.

.carousel > .slides > .slide:first-child { margin-top: 100px; } .carousel > .slides > .slide:last-child { margin-bottom: 100px; }

Great! We can now scroll past the edges, but we need something to snap it back after the user lifts their finger or pointer. For this, we’ll need the scroll-snap-type and scroll-snap-align properties

.carousel { scroll-snap-type: y mandatory; } .carousel > .slides > .slide { scroll-snap-align: start; } .carousel > .slides > .slide:first-child { margin-top: 100px; } .carousel > .slides > .slide:last-child { scroll-snap-align: end; margin-bottom: 100px; }

Note that the same applies to a horizontally scrolling element. For that, you’d change things up so that margin is applied to the element’s left and right edges instead of its top and bottom edges. You’ll also want to change the scroll-snap-type property’s value from y mandatory to x mandatory while you’re at it.

That’s really it! Here’s the final demo:

CodePen Embed Fallback

I know, I know. This isn’t some Earth-shattering or mind-blowing effect, but it does solve a very specific situation. And if you find yourself in that situation, now you have something in your back pocket to use.

Additional resources

• “The inside story of the iconic ‘rubber band’ effect that launched the iPhone” (Cult of Mac)
• “Six things I learnt about iOS Safari’s rubber band scrolling” (Special Agent Squeaky)
• “Scroll Bouncing On Your Websites” (Smashing Magazine)

Elastic Overflow Scrolling originally published on CSS-Tricks, which is part of the DigitalOcean family. You should get the newsletter.

The most significant user interface change from iOS 17 to iOS 18 are the navigation differences in Apple's Photos app. The ubiquitous tab bar that's became the default navigation model in mobile apps is gone and in its place is one long scrolling page. So how does it work and why?

Most mobile applications have adopted a bottom bar for primary navigation controls. On Android it's called bottom navigation and on iOS, a tab bar, but the purpose is the same: make the top-level sections of an application visible and let people move between them.

And it works. Across multiple studies and experiments, companies found when critical parts of an application are made more visible, usage of them increases. For example, Facebook saw that not only did engagement go up when they moved from a “hamburger” menu to a bottom tab bar in their iOS app, but several other important metrics went up as well. Results like this made use of tab bars grow.

But in iOS 18, Apple removed the tab bar in their Photos app. Whereas the prior version had visible tabs for the top-level sections (Library, For You, Albums, Search), the redesign is just a single scroll view. The features previously found in each tab are now accessed by scrolling up and down vs. switching between tabs. One notable exception is Search which stays anchored at the top of the screen.

In addition to the persistent Search button, there's also a Select action and user profile image that opens a sheet with account settings. As you scroll up into your Photo library a persistent set of View controls appears at the bottom of the screen as well. The Close action scrolls you to the end of your Photo library and reveals a bit of the actions below making the location of features previously found in tabs more clear.

It's certainly a big change and given the effectiveness of tab bars, its also a change that has people questioning why? I have no inside information on Apple's decision-making process here but based on what I've learned about how people use Google Photos, Yahoo! Photos, and Flickr, I can speculate.

1. By far the dominant use of a Photo gallery is scrolling to find an image whether to share, view, or just browse.
2. Very few people organize their photo libraries and those that do, do it rarely.
3. People continue to have poor experiences with searching images, despite lots of improvements, so they default to browsing when trying to find photos.
4. Most automatic curation features like those found in For You just get ignored.

All that together can easily get you to the design answer of "the app should just be a scrolling list of all your Photos". Of course there's trade-offs. The top-level sections, and their features are much less visible, and thereby less obvious. The people who do make use of features like Albums and Memories now need to scroll to them vs. tapping once. But as iOS18 rolls out to everyone in the Fall, we'll see if these trade-offs were worth it.

Last week Krijn and I decided to cancel performance.now() 2021. Although it was the right decision it leaves me in financially fairly dire straits. So I’m looking for new jobs and/or donations.

Even though the Corona trends in NL look good, and we could probably have brought 350 people together in November, we cannot be certain: there might be a new flare-up. More serious is the fact that it’s very hard to figure out how to apply the Corona checks Dutch government requires, especially for non-EU citizens. We couldn’t figure out how UK and US people should be tested, and for us that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Cancelling the conference relieved us of a lot of stress.

Still, it also relieved me of a lot of money. This is the fourth conference in a row we cannot run, and I have burned through all my reserves. That’s why I thought I’d ask for help.

So ...

Has QuirksMode.org ever saved you a lot of time on a project? Did it advance your career? If so, now would be a great time to make a donation to show your appreciation.

I am trying my hand at CSS coaching. Though I had only few clients so far I found that I like it and would like to do it more. As an added bonus, because I’m still writing my CSS for JavaScripters book I currently have most of the CSS layout modules in my head and can explain them straight away — even stacking contexts.

Or if there’s any job you know of that requires a technical documentation writer with a solid knowledge of web technologies and the browser market, drop me a line. I’m interested.

Anyway, thanks for listening.

I’m writing the position: sticky part of my book, and since I never worked with sticky before I’m not totally sure if what I’m saying is correct.

This is made worse by the fact that there are no very clear tutorials on sticky. That’s partly because it works pretty intuitively in most cases, and partly because the details can be complicated.

So here’s my draft 1 of position: sticky. There will be something wrong with it; please correct me where needed.

The inset properties are top, right, bottom and left. (I already introduced this terminology earlier in the chapter.)

h3,h4,pre {clear: left} section.scroll-container { border: 1px solid black; width: 300px; height: 250px; padding: 1em; overflow: auto; --text: 'scroll box'; float: left; clear: left; margin-right: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 1em; position: relative; font-size: 1.3rem; } .container,.outer-container { border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em; position: relative; --text: 'container'; } .outer-container { --text: 'outer container'; } :is(.scroll-container,.container,.outer-container):before { position: absolute; content: var(--text); top: 0.2em; left: 0.2em; font-size: 0.8rem; } section.scroll-container h2 { position: sticky; top: 0; background: white; margin: 0 !important; color: inherit !important; padding: 0.5em !important; border: 1px solid; font-size: 1.4rem !important; } .nowrap p { white-space: nowrap; } Introduction

position: sticky is a mix of relative and fixed. A sticky box takes its normal position in the flow, as if it had position: relative, but if that position scrolls out of view the sticky box remains in a position defined by its inset properties, as if it has position: fixed. A sticky box never escapes its container, though. If the container start or end scrolls past the sticky box abandons its fixed position and sticks to the top or the bottom of its container.

It is typically used to make sure that headers remain in view no matter how the user scrolls. It is also useful for tables on narrow screens: you can keep headers or the leftmost table cells in view while the user scrolls.

Scroll box and container

A sticky box needs a scroll box: a box that is able to scroll. By default this is the browser window — or, more correctly, the layout viewport — but you can define another scroll box by setting overflow on the desired element. The sticky box takes the first ancestor that could scroll as its scroll box and calculates all its coordinates relative to it.

A sticky box needs at least one inset property. These properties contain vital instructions, and if the sticky box doesn’t receive them it doesn’t know what to do.

A sticky box may also have a container: a regular HTML element that contains the sticky box. The sticky box will never be positioned outside this container, which thus serves as a constraint.

The first example shows this set-up. The sticky <h2> is in a perfectly normal <div>, its container, and that container is in a <section> that is the scroll box because it has overflow: auto. The sticky box has an inset property to provide instructions. The relevant styles are:

section.scroll-container { border: 1px solid black; width: 300px; height: 300px; overflow: auto; padding: 1em; } div.container { border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em; } section.scroll-container h2 { position: sticky; top: 0; } The rules Sticky header

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Now let’s see exactly what’s going on.

A sticky box never escapes its containing box. If it cannot obey the rules that follow without escaping from its container, it instead remains at the edge. Scroll down until the container disappears to see this in action.

A sticky box starts in its natural position in the flow, as if it has position: relative. It thus participates in the default flow: if it becomes higher it pushes the paragraphs below it downwards, just like any other regular HTML element. Also, the space it takes in the normal flow is kept open, even if it is currently in fixed position. Scroll down a little bit to see this in action: an empty space is kept open for the header.

A sticky box compares two positions: its natural position in the flow and its fixed position according to its inset properties. It does so in the coordinate frame of its scroll box. That is, any given coordinate such as top: 20px, as well as its default coordinates, is resolved against the content box of the scroll box. (In other words, the scroll box’s padding also constrains the sticky box; it will never move up into that padding.)

A sticky box with top takes the higher value of its top and its natural position in the flow, and positions its top border at that value. Scroll down slowly to see this in action: the sticky box starts at its natural position (let’s call it 20px), which is higher than its defined top (0). Thus it rests at its position in the natural flow. Scrolling up a few pixels doesn’t change this, but once its natural position becomes less than 0, the sticky box switches to a fixed layout and stays at that position.

The sticky box has bottom: 0

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Sticky header

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

It does the same for bottom, but remember that a bottom is calculated relative to the scroll box’s bottom, and not its top. Thus, a larger bottom coordinate means the box is positioned more to the top. Now the sticky box compares its default bottom with the defined bottom and uses the higher value to position its bottom border, just as before.

With left, it uses the higher value of its natural position and to position its left border; with right, it does the same for its right border, bearing in mind once more that a higher right value positions the box more to the left.

If any of these steps would position the sticky box outside its containing box it takes the position that just barely keeps it within its containing box.

Details Sticky header

Very, very long line of content to stretch up the container quite a bit

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

The four inset properties act independently of one another. For instance the following box will calculate the position of its top and left edge independently. They can be relative or fixed, depending on how the user scrolls.

p.testbox { position: sticky; top: 0; left: 0; }

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

The sticky box has top: 0; bottom: 0

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Sticky header

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Setting both a top and a bottom, or both a left and a right, gives the sticky box a bandwidth to move in. It will always attempt to obey all the rules described above. So the following box will vary between 0 from the top of the screen to 0 from the bottom, taking its default position in the flow between these two positions.

p.testbox { position: sticky; top: 0; bottom: 0; } No container

Regular content

Regular content

Sticky header

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

So far we put the sticky box in a container separate from the scroll box. But that’s not necessary. You can also make the scroll box itself the container if you wish. The sticky element is still positioned with respect to the scroll box (which is now also its container) and everything works fine.

Several containers Sticky header

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside outer container

Content outside outer container

Or the sticky item can be several containers removed from its scroll box. That’s fine as well; the positions are still calculated relative to the scroll box, and the sticky box will never leave its innermost container.

Changing the scroll box Sticky header

The container has overflow: auto.

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

One feature that catches many people (including me) unaware is giving the container an overflow: auto or hidden. All of a sudden it seems the sticky header doesn’t work any more.

What’s going on here? An overflow value of auto, hidden, or scroll makes an element into a scroll box. So now the sticky box’s scroll box is no longer the outer element, but the inner one, since that is now the closest ancestor that is able to scroll.

The sticky box appears to be static, but it isn’t. The crux here is that the scroll box could scroll, thanks to its overflow value, but doesn’t actually do so because we didn’t give it a height, and therefore it stretches up to accomodate all of its contents.

Thus we have a non-scrolling scroll box, and that is the root cause of our problems.

As before, the sticky box calculates its position by comparing its natural position relative to its scroll box with the one given by its inset properties. Point is: the sticky box doesn’t scroll relative to its scroll box, so its position always remains the same. Where in earlier examples the position of the sticky element relative to the scroll box changed when we scrolled, it no longer does so, because the scroll box doesn’t scroll. Thus there is no reason for it to switch to fixed positioning, and it stays where it is relative to its scroll box.

The fact that the scroll box itself scrolls upward is irrelevant; this doesn’t influence the sticky box in the slightest.

Sticky header

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Regular content

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

Content outside container

One solution is to give the new scroll box a height that is too little for its contents. Now the scroll box generates a scrollbar and becomes a scrolling scroll box. When we scroll it the position of the sticky box relative to its scroll box changes once more, and it switches from fixed to relative or vice versa as required.

Minor items

Finally a few minor items:

• It is no longer necessary to use position: -webkit-sticky. All modern browsers support regular position: sticky. (But if you need to cater to a few older browsers, retaining the double syntax doesn’t hurt.)
• Chrome (Mac) does weird things to the borders of the sticky items in these examples. I don’t know what’s going on and am not going to investigate.

Safari is holding back the web. It is the new IE, after all. In contrast, Chrome is pushing the web forward so hard that it’s starting to break. Meanwhile web developers do nothing except moan and complain. The only thing left to do is to pick our poison.

blockquote { font-size: inherit; font-family: inherit; } blockquote p { font-size: inherit; font-family: inherit; } Safari is the new IE

Recently there was yet another round of “Safari is the new IE” stories. Once Jeremy’s summary and a short discussion cleared my mind I finally figured out that Safari is not IE, and that Safari’s IE-or-not-IE is not the worst problem the web is facing.

Perry Sun argues that for developers, Safari is crap and outdated, emulating the old IE of fifteen years ago in this respect. He also repeats the theory that Apple is deliberately starving Safari of features in order to protect the app store, and thus its bottom line. We’ll get back to that.

The allegation that Safari is holding back web development by its lack of support for key features is not new, but it’s not true, either. Back fifteen years ago IE held back the web because web developers had to cater to its outdated technology stack. “Best viewed with IE” and all that. But do you ever see a “Best viewed with Safari” notice? No, you don’t. Another browser takes that special place in web developers’ hearts and minds.

Chrome is the new IE, but in reverse

Jorge Arango fears we’re going back to the bad old days with “Best viewed in Chrome.” Chris Krycho reinforces this by pointing out that, even though Chrome is not the standard, it’s treated as such by many web developers.

“Best viewed in Chrome” squares very badly with “Safari is the new IE.” Safari’s sad state does not force web developers to restrict themselves to Safari-supported features, so it does not hold the same position as IE.

So I propose to lay this tired old meme to rest. Safari is not the new IE. If anything it’s the new Netscape 4.

Meanwhile it is Chrome that is the new IE, but in reverse.

Break the web forward

Back in the day, IE was accused of an embrace, extend, and extinguish strategy. After IE6 Microsoft did nothing for ages, assuming it had won the web. Thanks to web developers taking action in their own name for the first (and only) time, IE was updated once more and the web moved forward again.

Google learned from Microsoft’s mistakes and follows a novel embrace, extend, and extinguish strategy by breaking the web and stomping on the bits. Who cares if it breaks as long as we go forward. And to hell with backward compatibility.

Back in 2015 I proposed to stop pushing the web forward, and as expected the Chrome devrels were especially outraged at this idea. It never went anywhere. (Truth to tell: I hadn’t expected it to.)

I still think we should stop pushing the web forward for a while until we figure out where we want to push the web forward to — but as long as Google is in charge that won’t happen. It will only get worse.

On alert

A blog storm broke out over the decision to remove alert(), confirm() and prompt(), first only the cross-origin variants, but eventually all of them. Jeremy and Chris Coyier already summarised the situation, while Rich Harris discusses the uses of the three ancient modals, especially when it comes to learning JavaScript.

With all these articles already written I will only note that, if the three ancient modals are truly as horrendous a security issue as Google says they are it took everyone a bloody long time to figure that out. I mean, they turn 25 this year.

Although it appears Firefox and Safari are on board with at least the cross-origin part of the proposal, there is no doubt that it’s Google that leads the charge.

From Google’s perspective the ancient modals have one crucial flaw quite apart from their security model: they weren’t invented there. That’s why they have to be replaced by — I don’t know what, but it will likely be a very complicated API.

Complex systems and arrogant priests rule the web

Thus the new embrace, extend, and extinguish is breaking backward compatibility in order to make the web more complicated. Nolan Lawson puts it like this:

we end up with convoluted specs like Service Worker that you need a PhD to understand, and yet we still don't have a working <dialog> element.

In addition, Google can be pretty arrogant and condescending, as Chris Ferdinandi points out.

The condescending “did you actually read it, it’s so clear” refrain is patronizing AF. It’s the equivalent of “just” or “simply” in developer documentation.

I read it. I didn’t understand it. That’s why I asked someone whose literal job is communicating with developers about changes Chrome makes to the platform.

This is not isolated to one developer at Chrome. The entire message thread where this change was surfaced is filled with folks begging Chrome not to move forward with this proposal because it will break all-the-things.

If you write documentation or a technical article and nobody understands it, you’ve done a crappy job. I should know; I’ve been writing this stuff for twenty years.

Extend, embrace, extinguish. And use lots of difficult words.

Patience is a virtue

As a reaction to web dev outcry Google temporarily halted the breaking of the web. That sounds great but really isn’t. It’s just a clever tactical move.

I saw this tactic in action before. Back in early 2016 Google tried to break the de-facto standard for the mobile visual viewport that I worked very hard to establish. I wrote a piece that resonated with web developers, whose complaints made Google abandon the plan — temporarily. They tried again in late 2017, and I again wrote an article, but this time around nobody cared and the changes took effect and backward compatibility was broken.

So the three ancient modals still have about 12 to 18 months to live. Somewhere in late 2022 to early 2023 Google will try again, web developers will be silent, and the modals will be gone.

The pursuit of appiness

But why is Google breaking the web forward at such a pace? And why is Apple holding it back?

Safari is kept dumb to protect the app store and thus revenue. In contrast, the Chrome team is pushing very hard to port every single app functionality to the browser. Ages ago I argued we should give up on this, but of course no one listened.

When performing Valley Kremlinology, it is useful to see Google policies as stemming from a conflict between internal pro-web and anti-web factions. We web developers mainly deal with the pro-web faction, the Chrome devrel and browser teams. On the other hand, the Android team is squarely in the anti-web camp.

When seen in this light the pro-web camp’s insistence on copying everything appy makes excellent sense: if they didn’t Chrome would lag behind apps and the Android anti-web camp would gain too much power. While I prefer the pro-web over the anti-web camp, I would even more prefer the web not to be a pawn in an internal Google power struggle. But it has come to that, no doubt about it.

Solutions?

Is there any good solution? Not really.

Jim Nielsen feels that part of the issue is the lack of representation of web developers in the standardization process. That sounds great but is proven not to work.

Three years ago Fronteers and I attempted to get web developers represented and were met with absolute disinterest. Nobody else cared even one shit, and the initiative sank like a stone.

So a hypothetical web dev representative in W3C is not going to work. Also, the organisational work would involve a lot of unpaid labour, and I, for one, am not willing to do it again. Neither is anyone else. So this is not the solution.

And what about Firefox? Well, what about it? Ten years ago it made a disastrous mistake by ignoring the mobile web for way too long, then it attempted an arrogant and uninformed come-back with Firefox OS that failed, and its history from that point on is one long slide into obscurity. That’s what you get with shitty management.

Pick your poison

So Safari is trying to slow the web down. With Google’s move-fast-break-absofuckinglutely-everything axiom in mind, is Safari’s approach so bad?

Regardless of where you feel the web should be on this spectrum between Google and Apple, there is a fundamental difference between the two.

We have the tools and procedures to manage Safari’s disinterest. They’re essentially the same as the ones we deployed against Microsoft back in the day — though a fundamental difference is that Microsoft was willing to talk while Apple remains its old haughty self, and its “devrels” aren’t actually allowed to do devrelly things such as managing relations with web developers. (Don’t blame them, by the way. If something would ever change they’re going to be our most valuable internal allies — just as the IE team was back in the day.)

On the other hand, we have no process for countering Google’s reverse embrace, extend, and extinguish strategy, since a section of web devs will be enthusiastic about whatever the newest API is. Also, Google devrels talk. And talk. And talk. And provide gigs of data that are hard to make sense of. And refer to their proprietary algorithms that “clearly” show X is in the best interest of the web — and don’t ask questions! And make everything so fucking complicated that we eventually give up and give in.

So pick your poison. Shall we push the web forward until it’s broken, or shall we break it by inaction? What will it be? Privately, my money is on Google. So we should say goodbye to the old web while we still can.