2027 Web Platform Feature Ranking(interop-rank.fxdx.dev) |
2027 Web Platform Feature Ranking(interop-rank.fxdx.dev) |
CSS is one of the worst (web) technologies, breaking the very concept of composability, a core technique of complexity management. It also has all sorts of constructs trying to replicate the features of a proper programming language. Rampant use of CSS is an architectural smell.
And yet people will defend it to death. Every large project I have inherited has massive CSS files filled with hairy rules, utterly unmaintainable despite whatever people will tell you.
In my own projects now, large or small, I refuse to use CSS broadly. Except for a few global styles in a single small CSS file, I use inline styles for pretty much everything, combines with other code in a neatly composable components. This works very well.
Sorry for my strong opinions, but in my view the over-reliance on CSS and amount of work on it has held back the web from being what it really can be for rich apps. What we should be aiming for is to build in rich and very customizable components right into HTML with real-world sophistication. And allow websites to be installed as apps easily. These alone will do more for the web that all these CSS band-aids.
Inline styles are CSS. It sounds like you find components easier to compose when their CSS is applied directly to elements rather than via selectors, which is totally reasonable. But doesn't that undercut the broader claim that CSS itself somehow inherently breaks composability?
Responsive iframes been a long time coming.
Good to see.
In cases like this, the iframe has to manually call window.requestResize(). And… that just doesn't feel like a big step up from the hacks we do today.
Fixed! Thanks for the suggestion. There was a whole read-only mode already there for when the process closes. I just didn't think of using it when the user is logged out.
This example is almost true, but not entirely. For example the getBoxQuads API was something that testing tools wanted, which led to it being standardised [1]
More generally there can be surprising dependencies between features when it comes to implementation (e.g. both DOM and layout features might depend on accessibility work).
So from an implementer point of view, trying to encode the team that would do the work into the ranking tool is harder than it might sound.
One can imagine providing categories of features to help people find things that they're interested in. The counter argument is that people might just filter down to the kind of proposals they think they want, and end up missing things that were more important but got put in a different category.
In the end this simple approach proved helpful to us (Mozilla) last year, so we decided to do more or less the same again.
The current interop has CSS features, WebRTC, WebTransport, IndexedDB, PWA stuff, etc:
> When authorized, the GitHub App will be able to determine which resources you can access that the app can also access.
The 'app' is used for login only. It has no access to resources.