What if I told you you could use a single property value to turn multiple different values on and off across multiple different properties and even across multiple CSS rules?
What if I told you you could turn this flat button into a glossy skeuomorphic button by just tweaking one custom property --is-raised, and that would set its border, background image, box and text shadows in one fell swoop?
Web Components had so much potential to empower HTML to do more, and make web development more accessible to non-programmers and easier for programmers. Remember how exciting it was every time we got new shiny HTML elements that actually do stuff? Remember how exciting it was to be able to do sliders, color pickers, dialogs, disclosure widgets straight in the HTML, without having to include any widget libraries?
The promise of Web Components was that we’d get this convenience, but for a much wider range of HTML elements, developed much faster, as nobody needs to wait for the full spec + implementation process. We’d just include a script, and boom, we have more elements at our disposal!
Or, that was the idea. Somewhere along the way, the space got flooded by JS frameworks aficionados, who revel in complex APIs, overengineered build processes and dependency graphs that look like the roots of a banyan tree.
I made this chart in the amazing Excalidraw about two weeks ago:
It only took me 10 minutes! Shortly after, my laptop broke down into repeated kernel panics, and it spent about 10 days in service (I was in a remote place when it broke, so it took some time to get it to service). Yesterday, I was finally reunited with it, turned it on, launched Chrome, and saw it again. It gave me a smile, and I realized I never got to post it, so I tweeted this:
The tweet kinda blew up! It seems many, many developers identify with it. A few also disagreed with it, especially with the “Does it actually work?” line. So I figured I should write a bit about the rationale behind it. I originally wrote it in a tweet, but then I realized I should probably post it in a less transient medium, that is more well suited to longer text.
I’ve posted before about my work for the Web Almanac this year. To make it easier to calculate the stats about CSS selectors, we looked to use an existing selector parser, but most were too big and/or had dependencies or didn’t account for all selectors we wanted to parse, and we’d need to write our own walk and specificity methods anyway. So I did what I usually do in these cases: I wrote my own!
For some of the statistics we are going to study for this year’s Web Almanac we may end up needing a list of CSS shorthands and their longhands. Now this is typically done by maintaining a data structure by hand or guessing based on property name structure. But I knew that if we were going to do it by hand, it’s very easy to miss a few of the less popular ones, and the naming rule where shorthands are a prefix of their longhands has failed to get standardized and now has even more exceptions than it used to. And even if we do an incredibly thorough job, next year the data structure will be inaccurate, because CSS and its implementations evolve fast. The browser knows what the shorthands are, surely we should be able to get the information from it …right? Then we could use it directly if this is a client-side library, or in the case of the Almanac, where code needs to be fast because it will run on millions of websites, paste the precomputed result into whatever script we run.
While I do have some gripes with them, it’s too late for any of these things to change, so I’m embracing the good parts and have cautiously started using them in new projects. I do quite like that I can just use import statements and dynamic import() for dependencies with URLs right from my JS, without module loaders, extra <script> tags in my HTML, or hacks with dynamic <script> tags and load events (in fact, Bliss has had a helper for this very thing that I’ve used extensively in older projects). I love that I don’t need any libraries for this, and I can use it client-side, anywhere, even in my codepens.
Once you start using ESM, you realize that most libraries out there are not written in ESM, nor do they include ESM builds. Many are still using globals, and those that target Node.js use CommonJS (CJS). What can we do in that case? Unfortunately, ES Modules are not really designed with any import (pun intended) mechanism for these syntaxes, but, there are some strategies we could employ.
So what is the Cicada Principle and how does it relate to web design in a nutshell? It boils down to: when using repeating elements (tiled backgrounds, different effects on multiple elements etc), using prime numbers for the size of the repeating unit maximizes the appearance of organic randomness. Note that this only works when the parameters you set are independent.
When I recently redesigned my blog, I ended up using a variation of the Cicada principle to pseudo-randomize the angles of code snippets. I didn’t think much of it until I saw this tweet:
Now that optional chaining is supported across the board, I decided to finally refactor Mavo to use it (yes, yes, we do provide a transpiled version as well for older browsers, settle down). This is a moment I have been waiting for a long time, as I think optional chaining is the single most substantial JS syntax improvement since arrow functions and template strings. Yes, I think it’s more significant than async/await, just because of the mere frequency of code it improves. Property access is literally everywhere.
One of my side projects these days is a color space agnostic color conversion & manipulation library, which I’m developing together with my husband, Chris Lilley (you can see a sneak peek of its docs above). He brings his color science expertise to the table, and I bring my JS & API design experience, so it’s a great match and I’m really excited about it! (if you’re serious about color and you’re building a tool or demo that would benefit from it contact me, we need as much early feedback on the API as we can get! )
For the documentation, I wanted to have the page navigation on the side (when there is enough space), right under the header when scrolled all the way to the top, but I wanted it to scroll with the page (as if it was absolutely positioned) until the header is out of view, and then stay at the top for the rest of the scrolling (as if it used fixed positioning).