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!
These snippets are my attempt to save and organize various bits of code, best practices, and resources relating to web development and design. They also function as a to do list of sorts, for things I want to implement in my own code, but haven’t yet. The concept is inspired by Jeremy Keith’s links and CSS-Tricks, among other things. Enjoy.
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.
- 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.
We’ve been working with SVGs a lot recently, which has led our developers down a rabbithole of discovery! Here are some things to consider when it comes to SVGs and accessibility.
1. <img> tags and SVGs
When SVGs are implemented as <img> tags with an .svg as the source, we’ve encountered a few issues for VoiceOver and TalkBack users. These issues occur when those <img> tags don’t also have an ARIA role=”img” attribute.
2. <title> tags and SVGs
We often see examples of making SVGs accessible by simply adding a <title> element within the inline <svg>. While this does help in some situations, like a lone SVG icon within a link, adding a <title> element doesn’t make SVGs accessible in all browsing environments.
For example, when using Firefox and NVDA, a link containing an SVG would be recognized as a link, but the text within the <title> element would not be announced. NVDA announces the path within the href attribute only.
Adding an aria-labelledby attribute to the SVG can help expose the text within the <title> element to the browser’s accessibility API. However, even with this in place, NVDA does not announce the <title> text as we might expect.
Our most recommended approach when it comes to browser support and consistency across screen readers is to add a visually-hidden element as a sibling element to the <svg>. With this implementation, we’ve found that all browser and screen reader combinations tested were able to announce the link with the expected text announcement.
We also recommend adding aria-hidden=”true” to the <svg> element itself. This is to help prevent having any other text that may be embedded within the SVG be announced by screen readers. Then, the only text that should be announced would be the content within that visually-hidden element.
7. Colour contrast
While not a bug per se, we also see a lot of cases where designers and developers don’t plan for colour contrast issues for SVGs. Since SVGs function just like transparent GIFs in how they are displayed, different page background colors and effects can cause unanticipated issues for low vision users.
For example, a black SVG icon that’s perfectly visible with a white page background is going to be invisible in a Windows High Contrast theme that uses a black background. This is a common use case for users who use High Contrast settings due to light sensitivity or related issues. When you provide a solid background or contrasting border for SVGs, you can help avoid those kinds of problems.
This is kinda cool. The author decided to try and create depth in a design system without using any drop shadows. The trick? use varying amounts of contrast to denote depth, with things in the background having less contrast than those in the foreground. It’s well worth a read.
If you enjoy Lovecraftian horror mixed hilariously with nerdy advice, this might be your thing:
You can’t parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can’t be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool that can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here so many times before, the use of regex will not allow you to consume HTML. Regular expressions are a tool that is insufficiently sophisticated to understand the constructs employed by HTML. HTML is not a regular language and hence cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Regex queries are not equipped to break down HTML into its meaningful parts. so many times but it is not getting to me. Even enhanced irregular regular expressions as used by Perl are not up to the task of parsing HTML. You will never make me crack. HTML is a language of sufficient complexity that it cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Even Jon Skeet cannot parse HTML using regular expressions. Every time you attempt to parse HTML with regular expressions, the unholy child weeps the blood of virgins, and Russian hackers pwn your webapp. Parsing HTML with regex summons tainted souls into the realm of the living. HTML and regex go together like love, marriage, and ritual infanticide. The <center> cannot hold it is too late. The force of regex and HTML together in the same conceptual space will destroy your mind like so much watery putty. If you parse HTML with regex you are giving in to Them and their blasphemous ways which doom us all to inhuman toil for the One whose Name cannot be expressed in the Basic Multilingual Plane, he comes. HTML-plus-regexp will liquify the nerves of the sentient whilst you observe, your psyche withering in the onslaught of horror. Rege̿̔̉x-based HTML parsers are the cancer that is killing StackOverflow it is too late it is too late we cannot be saved the trangession of a chi͡ld ensures regex will consume all living tissue (except for HTML which it cannot, as previously prophesied) dear lord help us how can anyone survive this scourge using regex to parse HTML has doomed humanity to an eternity of dread torture and security holes using regex as a tool to process HTML establishes a breach between this world and the dread realm of c͒ͪo͛ͫrrupt entities (like SGML entities, but more corrupt) a mere glimpse of the world of regex parsers for HTML will instantly transport a programmer’s consciousness into a world of ceaseless screaming, he comes, the pestilent slithy regex-infection will devour your HTML parser, application and existence for all time like Visual Basic only worse he comes he comes do not fight he com̡e̶s, ̕h̵is un̨ho͞ly radiańcé destro҉ying all enli̍̈́̂̈́ghtenment, HTML tags lea͠ki̧n͘g fr̶ǫm ̡yo͟ur eye͢s̸ ̛l̕ik͏e liquid pain, the song of re̸gular expression parsing will extinguish the voices of mortal man from the sphere I can see it can you see ̲͚̖͔̙î̩́t̲͎̩̱͔́̋̀ it is beautiful the f
inal snuffing of the lies of Man ALL IS LOŚ͖̩͇̗̪̏̈́T ALL IS LOST the pon̷y he comes he c̶̮omes he comes the ichor permeates all MY FACE MY FACE ᵒh god no NO NOO̼OO NΘ stop the an*̶͑̾̾̅ͫ͏̙̤g͇̫͛͆̾ͫ̑͆l͖͉̗̩̳̟̍ͫͥͨe̠̅s
͎a̧͈͖r̽̾̈́͒͑enot rè̑ͧ̌aͨl̘̝̙̃ͤ͂̾̆ ZA̡͊͠͝LGΌ ISͮ̂҉̯͈͕̹̘̱ TO͇̹̺ͅƝ̴ȳ̳ TH̘Ë͖́̉ ͠P̯͍̭O̚N̐Y̡ H̸̡̪̯ͨ͊̽̅̾̎Ȩ̬̩̾͛ͪ̈́̀́͘ ̶̧̨̱̹̭̯ͧ̾ͬC̷̙̲̝͖ͭ̏ͥͮ͟Oͮ͏̮̪̝͍M̲̖͊̒ͪͩͬ̚̚͜Ȇ̴̟̟͙̞ͩ͌͝S̨̥̫͎̭ͯ̿̔̀ͅ
Have you tried using an XML parser instead?
So this is a really interesting way to determine which, if any CSS rules are unused in a stylesheet, site-wide:
Part of this story could certainly be about deleting CSS that is determined to be “unused” in a project. I know there is incredible demand for this kind of tooling. I feel like there are some developers damn near frothing at the mouth to blast their CSS through some kind of fancy tool to strip away anything unneeded.
Here’s how one company I heard from was doing it:
- They injected a script onto the page for some subset of users.
- The script would look at the CSSOM and find every single selector in the CSS for that page.
- It would also run a querySelectorAll(“*”) and find every single DOM node on that page.
- It would compare those two sets and find all selectors that seemed to be unused.
- In order to get the best results, it would fire this script after a random amount of seconds, on a random set of users, in a random set of conditions. Even with this, it needed a lot of data over a long period of time.
- After that had run for long enough, there was a set of CSS selectors that seemed likely to be unused.
- To be sure, unique background images were applied to all those selectors.
- After applying those and waiting for another length of time, the server logs were checked to make sure those images were never accessed. If they were, that selector was used, and would have to stay.
Ultimately, the unused selectors could safely be deleted from the CSS.
Whew! That’s an awful lot of work to remove some CSS.
But as you can imagine, it’s fairly safe. Imagine just checking one page’s CSS coverage. You’ll definitely find a bunch of unused CSS. One page, in one specific state, is not representative of your entire website.