With a Progressive Enhancement mindset, support actually means support. We’re not trying to create an identical experience: we’re creating a viable experience instead.
Also with Progressive Enhancement, it’s incredibly likely that your IE11 user, or your user on a low-powered device, or even your user on a poor connection won’t notice that they’re experiencing a “minor” experience because it’ll just work for them. This is the magic, right there. Everyone’s a winner.
Sunday, October 13th, 2019
Saturday, October 5th, 2019
Test your knowledge of the original version of HTML—how many elements can you name?
Saturday, September 7th, 2019
An interesting proposal to allow websites to detect certain SMS messages. The UX implications are fascinating.
Thursday, August 22nd, 2019
I had a chat with Vitaly for half an hour about all things webby. It was fun!
Friday, August 9th, 2019
Hidde gives an in-depth explanation of the Accessibility Object Model, coming soon to browsers near you:
In a way, that’s a bit like what Service Workers do for the network and Houdini for style: give developers control over something that was previously done only by the browser.
Tuesday, July 30th, 2019
Thursday, July 18th, 2019
min() gets better support (it’s currently in Safari), we’ll be able to create container queryish declarations like this:
grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fill, minmax(min(10rem, 100%), 1fr));
Wednesday, July 3rd, 2019
Chris describes exactly why I wrote about
But we should be extra watchful about stuff like this. If any browser goes rogue and just starts shipping stuff, web standards is over. Life for devs gets a lot harder and the web gets a lot worse. The stakes are high. And it’s not going to happen overnight, it’s going to happen with little tiny things like this. Keep that blue beanie on.
Wednesday, June 19th, 2019
Shockwaves rippled across the web standards community recently when it appeared that Google Chrome was unilaterally implementing a new element called
toast. It turns out that’s not the case, but the confusion is understandable.
First off, this all kicked off with the announcement of “intent to implement”. That makes it sounds like Google are intending to, well, …implement this. In fact “intent to implement” really means “intend to mess around with this behind a flag”. The language is definitely confusing and this is something that will hopefully be addressed.
Secondly, Chrome isn’t going to ship a
toast element. Instead, this is a proposal for a custom element currently called
std-toast. I’m assuming that should the experiment prove successful, it’s not a foregone conclusion that the final element name will be called
toast (minus the sexually-transmitted-disease prefix). If this turns out to be a useful feature, there will surely be a discussion between implementators about the naming of the finished element.
This is the ideal candidate for a web component. It makes total sense to create a custom element along the lines of
std-toast. At first I was confused about why this was happening inside of a browser instead of first being created as a standalone web component, but it turns out that there’s been a fair bit of research looking at existing implementations in libraries and web components. So this actually looks like a good example of paving an existing cowpath.
But it didn’t come across that way. The timing of announcements felt like this was something that was happening without prior discussion. Terence Eden writes:
It feels like a Google-designed, Google-approved, Google-benefiting idea which has been dumped onto the Web without any consideration for others.
I know that isn’t the case. And I know how many dedicated people have worked hard on this proposal.
To be clear, while I think there is value in minting a native HTML element to fill a defined gap, I am wary of the approach Google has taken. A repo from a new-to-the-industry Googler getting a lot of promotion from Googlers, with Googlers on social media doing damage control for the blowback, WHATWG Googlers handling questions on the repo, and Google AMP strongly supporting it (to reduce its own footprint), all add up to raise alarm bells with those who advocated for a community-driven, needs-based, accessible web.
But my concern wasn’t so much about the nature of the new elements, but of how we learned about them and what that says about how web standardization works.
So there’s a general feeling (outside of Google) that there’s something screwy here about the order of events. A lot discussion and research seems to have happened in isolation before announcing the intent to implement:
It does not appear that any discussions happened with other browser vendors or standards bodies before the intent to implement.
Why is this a problem? Google is seeking feedback on a solution, not on how to solve the problem.
Going back to my early confusion about putting a web component directly into a browser, this question on Discourse echoes my initial reaction:
Why not release
std-toast(and other elements in development) as libraries first?
The extensible web movement focused on exposing low-level APIs to developers: the fetch API, the cache API, custom elements, Houdini, and all of those other building blocks. Layered APIs, on the other hand, focuses on high-level features …like, say, an HTML element for displaying “toast” notifications.
Layered APIs is an interesting idea, but I’m worried that it could be used to circumvent discussion between implementers. It’s a route to unilaterally creating new browser features first and standardising after the fact. I know that’s how many features already end up in browsers, but I think that the sooner that authors, implementers, and standards bodies get a say, the better.
I certainly don’t think this is a good look for Google given the debacle of AMP’s “my way or the highway” rollout. I know that’s a completely different team, but the external perception of Google amongst developers has been damaged by the AMP project’s anti-competitive abuse of Google’s power in search.
Right now, a lot of people are jumpy about Microsoft’s move to Chromium for Edge. My friends at Microsoft have been reassuring me that while it’s always a shame to reduce browser engine diversity, this could actually be a good thing for the standards process: Microsoft could theoretically keep Google in check when it comes to what features are introduced to the Chromium engine.
But that only works if there is some kind of standards process. Layered APIs in general—and
std-toast in particular—hint at a future where a single browser vendor can plough ahead on their own. I sincerely hope that’s a misreading of the situation and that this has all been an exercise in miscommunication and misunderstanding.
Like Dave Cramer says:
I hear a lot about how anyone can contribute to the web platform. We’ve all heard the preaching about incubation, the Extensible Web, working in public, paving the cowpaths, and so on. But to an outside observer this feels like Google making all the decisions, in private, and then asking for public comment after the feature has been designed.
Tuesday, June 11th, 2019
I’ll be in my bunk.
Thursday, June 6th, 2019
Here’s the video of the talk I gave at State Of The Browser last year. The audio is a bit out of sync with the video.
The talk is called The Web Is Agreement. It’s ostensibly about web standards, but I used that as a jumping off point for talking about life, the universe, and everything.
I enjoyed giving this talk, but I’ve only ever given it this one time. If you know of any events where this talk would be a good fit, let me know.
Tuesday, May 28th, 2019
It’s Armistice Day in the world of HTML:
WHATWG maintains the HTML and DOM Living Standards.
W3C stops independent publishing of a designated list of specifications related to HTML and DOM and instead will work to take WHATWG Review Drafts to W3C Recommendations.
It feels like the loop is finally being closed on what I wrote about in the opening chapter of HTML5 For Web Designers back in 2010.
Wednesday, May 22nd, 2019
Here he is talking about custom properties in CSS as part of his Making Future Interfaces video series.
Tuesday, April 30th, 2019
Jason describes the next big thing in web typography: streaming fonts!
…to enable the ability for only the required part of the font be downloaded on any given page, and for subsequent requests for that font to dynamically ‘patch’ the original download with additional sets of glyphs as required on successive page views—even if they occur on separate sites.
Wednesday, April 10th, 2019
document.querySelectorfirst got wide browser support and started to end jQuery’s ubiquity? It finally gave us a way to do natively what jQuery had been providing for years: easy selection of DOM elements. I believe the same is about to happen to frontend frameworks like Angular and React.
The article goes on to give a good technical overview of custom elements, templates, and the Shadow DOM, but I was surprised to see it making reference to the
is syntax for extending existing HTML elements—I’m pretty sure that that is, sadly, dead in the water.
Monday, April 8th, 2019
loading attribute for images and iframes is coming to Chrome. The best part:
You can also use
loadingas a progressive enhancement. Browsers that support the attribute can get the new lazy-loading behavior with
loading=lazyand those that don’t will still have images load.
Tuesday, April 2nd, 2019
This might just be the most nerdily specific book I’ve read and enjoyed. Even if you’re not planning to build a web browser any time soon, it’s kind of fascinating to see how HTML is parsed—and how much of an achievement the HTML spec is, for specifying consistent error-handling, if nothing else.
The last few chapters are still in progress, but you can read the whole thing online or buy an ePub version.
Friday, March 22nd, 2019
Everything you need to know about hyphenation on the web today, from Rich’s galaxy brain.
Hyphenation is a perfect example of progressive enhancement, so you can start applying the above now if you think your readers will benefit from it – support among browsers will only increase.
A fascinating look at the web today with IE8. And it’s worth remembering who might be experiencing the web like this:
Whoever they are, you can bet they’re not using an old browser just to annoy you. Nobody deliberately chooses a worse browsing experience.
The article also outlines two possible coping strategies:
- Polyfilling Strive for feature parity for all by filling in the missing browser functionality.
- Progressive Enhancement Start from a core experience, then use feature detection to layer on functionality.
Take a wild guess as to which strategy I support.
There’s a bigger point made at the end of all this:
IE8 is today’s scapegoat. Tomorrow it’ll be IE9, next year it’ll be Safari, a year later it might be Chrome. You can swap IE8 out for ‘old browser of choice’. The point is, there will always be some divide between what browsers developers build for, and what browsers people are using. We should stop scoffing at that and start investing in robust, inclusive engineering solutions. The side effects of these strategies tend to pay dividends in terms of accessibility, performance and network resilience, so there’s a bigger picture at play here.