Snippets

Dave Rupert has encountered some confusing not-actually-bugs with grid item widths in CSS Grid, and provided this as a fix:

The really short version? Absolutely. Slightly longer version:

Grid is new! Surely it has terrible browser support?

CSS Grid Layout shipped into Chrome, Firefox, Opera and Safari in March of this year. Microsoft Edge currently have an updated Version of Grid available behind a flag in Preview builds. At the time of writing, Can I Use indicates a global availability of CSS Grid Layout of 65.64%, rising to 70.75% if you include the prefixed version in IE10, 11 and current Edge. This is a rate of adoption we’ve never seen before for such a huge feature. It isn’t surprising that people don’t realise how many visitors will have support.

[…]

And non-supporting browsers?

CSS has the solution for you. To start with, defined in the Grid and Flexbox specifications are exactly how those specifications overwrite older layout methods.

Therefore if you want to use floats, inline-block, multiple-column layout, flexbox or even display: table as a fallback for your grid layout then the spec has you covered. You can overwrite those methods in a safe and predictable way. I made a cheatsheet explaining the fallbacks. I also cover several of these in my talk which was recorded at Render Conference earlier this year.

CSS also has Feature Queries. These have really great browser support, and the nice thing about Feature Queries is that you don’t need to concern yourself with the browsers that don’t support feature queries. There is no browser supporting Grid Layout and not supporting Feature Queries.

[…]

Generally you will then have a few things in the fallback CSS that will “leak through” to the grid layout. This is often widths on items as we need to assign widths to items in legacy layout to fake something that looks like it is using a grid. Therefore we use a simple feature query, checking for support of Grid Layout, and there we perhaps set widths back to auto.

The fact old browsers exist is not your fault. Don’t start these discussions by acting as if it is your failing that you can’t get the site looking identical in all browsers released in the last 10 years, while using technology only released this year. It’s not your fault, but it is your problem. It is your problem, your responsibility as a web professional to get yourself into a position where you can take the right course of action for each project.

What do infinite scrolling, lazy loading, and online advertisements all have in common?

They need to know about—and react to—the visibility of elements on a page!

Unfortunately, knowing whether or not an element is visible has traditionally been difficult on the Web. Most solutions listen for scroll and resize events, then use DOM APIs like getBoundingClientRect() to manually calculate where elements are relative to the viewport. This usually works, but it’s inefficient and doesn’t take into account other ways in which an element’s visibility can change, such as a large image finally loading higher up on the page, which pushes everything else downward.

Things get worse for advertisements, since real money is involved. As Malte Ubl explained in his presentation at JSConf Iceland, advertisers don’t want to pay for ads that never get displayed. To make sure they know when ads are visible, they cover them in dozens of tiny, single-pixel Flash movies whose visibility can be inferred from their framerate. On platforms without Flash, like smartphones, advertisers set up timers to force browsers to recalculate the position of each ad every few milliseconds.

These techniques kill performance, drain batteries, and would be completely unnecessary if the browser could just notify us whenever an element’s visibility changed.

That’s what IntersectionObserver does.

In the nooks and crannies of the web performance discipline there are no simple answers, except “do your research”. Rely on analytics to decide if bundling is a good idea for your HTTP/2-driven site. Do you have a lot of users that only go to one or two pages and leave? Maybe don’t waste your time bundling stuff. Do your users navigate deeply throughout your site and spend significant time there? Maybe bundle.

This much is clear to me: If you move your HTTP/1-optimized site to an HTTP/2 host and change nothing in your client-side architecture, it’s not going to be a big deal. So don’t trust blanket statements some web developer writing blog posts (i.e., me). Figure out how your users behave, what optimizations makes the best sense for your situation, and adjust your code accordingly. Good luck!

Now browsers have audio. They have video. They even have WebGL and VR. And all those technologies work on mobile. The writing’s been on the wall for Flash for a while. Yet still, I’m sad to see it go. It was a brilliant crucible of creativity. A forge for many emerging artists in the field of creative coding, and many of the concepts from Flash and ActionScript were the proving grounds for their modern browser equivalents.

I’ll be looking back fondly on those years, rather than spitting on Flash’s grave. And as we see the last of the great browser plugins disappear* I hope you’ll join me in celebrating the creative culture that it nurtured.

*RealPlayer 4eva!

Until now, there has been no good tool for documenting large JavaScript projects. JSDoc, long the sole contender, has some nice properties:

• A well-defined set of tags for describing common structures
• Tooling like the Closure Compiler which hooks into those tags

But the output is always a mere alphabetical list of everything in your project. JSDoc scrambles up and flattens out your functions, leaving new users to infer their relationships and mentally sort them into comprehensible groups. While you can get away with this for tiny libraries, it fails badly for large ones like Fathom, which has complex new concepts to explain. What I wanted for Fathom’s manual was the ability to organize it logically, intersperse explanatory prose with extracted docs, and add entire sections which are nothing but conceptual overview and yet link into the rest of the work.

The Python world has long favored Sphinx, a mature documentation tool with support for many languages and output formats, along with top-notch indexing, glossary generation, search, and cross-referencing. People have written entire books in it. Via plugins, it supports everything from Graphviz diagrams to YouTube videos. However, its JavaScript support has always lacked the ability to extract docs from code.

Now sphinx-js adds that ability, giving JavaScript developers the best of both worlds.