The unfair collusion between Google AMP and Google Search might just bite ‘em on the ass.
Tess calls for more precise language—like “site” and “origin”—when talking about browsers and resources:
When talking about web features with security or privacy impact, folks often talk about “first parties” and “third parties”. Everyone sort of knows what we mean when we use these terms, but it turns out that we often mean different things, and what we each think these terms mean usually doesn’t map cleanly onto the technical mechanisms browsers actually use to distinguish different actors for security or privacy purposes.
Employing the principle of least power for better digital preservation:
New frameworks and technologies spring up to try and cope with the speed of change. More and more ways to build and release things faster and cheaper becomes the norm. And, the more this happens, the more we deviate from standards: good ol’ HTML and CSS.
But you can also contribute to it …by looking ahead to the next fifteen years:
Let’s imagine it’s 2035…
How do you hope the practice of design will have changed for the better?
Fill out an online postcard with your hopes for the future.
This is a handy tool if you’re messing around with Twitter cards and other metacrap.
I’ve thought about these questions for over a year and narrowed my feelings of browser diversity down to two major value propositions:
- Browser diversity keeps the Web deliberately slow
- Browser diversity fosters consensus and cooperation over corporate rule
This is a wonderful tale of spelunking into standards from Darius Kazemi—I had no idea that HTTP status codes have their origin in a hastily made decision in the days of ARPANET.
20 people got together at MIT in 1972 for a weekend workshop. On the second day, a handful of people in a breakout session decided it would be a good idea to standardize error messages between two services for transferring data, even though those two services had not necessarily planned to speak to one another. One thing led to another, and now 404 is synonymous with “I can’t find the thing.”
This story is exactly the kind of layering of technologies that I was getting at in the first chapter of Resilient Web Design.
HTTP status codes are largely an accident of history. The people who came up with them didn’t plan on defining a numerical namespace that would last half a century or work its way into popular culture. You see this pattern over and over in the history of technology.
This is a great talk by Hidde, looking at the history and evolution of cascading style sheets. Right up my alley!
John weighs in on the clashing priorities of browser vendors.
Imagine if the web never got CSS. Never got a way to style content in sophisticated ways. It’s hard to imagine its rise to prominence in the early 2000s. I’d not be alone in arguing a similar lack of access to the sort of features inherent to the mobile experience that WebKit and the folks at Mozilla have expressed concern about would (not might) largely consign the Web to an increasingly marginal role.
This is great! Ideas for allowing more styling of form controls. I agree with the goals 100% and I like the look of the proposed solutions too.
The team behind this are looking for feedback so be sure to share your thoughts (I’ll probably formulate mine into a blog post).
An experiment to crowdfund the implementation of web standards in browsers.
I’m not sure how I feel about this.
A trashcan, a tyepface, and a tactile keyboard. Marcin gets obsessive (as usual).
Myself and Stuart had a chat with Brian about browser engine diversity.
Here’s the audio file if you’d like to huffduff it.
A really great one-page guide to HTML from Bruce. I like his performance-focused intro:
If your site is based on good HTML, it will load fast. Browsers incrementally render HTML—that is, they will display a partially downloaded web page to the user while the browser awaits the remaining files from the server.
You see, diversity of rendering engines isn’t actually in itself the point. What’s really important is diversity of influence: who has the ability to make decisions which shape the web in particular ways, and do they make those decisions for good reasons or not so good?
input type="range" and then figure out the CSS you need (which, alas, involves lots of vendor prefixes).
Here, Brian proposes a kind of minimum viable web component that handles logic like keyboard control and accessibility, but leaves the styling practically untouched. Check out his panel-set demo of a tabbed interface.
I really, really like the way that it wraps existing content. If the web component fails for any reason, the content is still available. So the web component is a progressive enhancement:
An experimental custom element that wraps plain-old HTML (view the source) and decorates function, keyboard handling, accessibility information.
Here’s one simple, practical way to make apps perform better on mobile devices: always configure HTML input fields with the correct
autocompleteattributes. While these three attributes are often discussed in isolation, they make the most sense in the context of mobile user experience when you think of them as a team.
This is an excellent deep dive with great advice:
You may think that you are familiar with the basic
autocompleteoptions, such as those that help the user fill in credit card numbers or address form fields, but I’d urge you to review them to make sure that you are aware of all of the options. The spec lists over 50 values!