The problem with using CSS for animations is that if the UX designers make a minor change to the spec, you might be forced to rip out the whole thing and redo it in JavaScript.
You might not need JavaScript
61–70 of 254 posts
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari is the new IE6, stop supporting it and let it die. It will not get any better anyway. If most of your users are on iOS, then make an app for them, it's what Apple also want you to do...
I have no idea why people use Chrome. Chrome/Google has terrible/no support of many browser layout & interaction features, such as CSS Regions & scroll snap points. Also, Safari is just a much better browser than Chrome. We need to make sure people stop using Chrome and move to the default browser in their environment - Safari & Edge. If you support the default browser, then you're going to be fine.
Well I use Chrome because I find the development tools to be much better than those in Safari.
It gets tedious switching the default browser setting over so I tend to just use Chrome for everything.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#63CSS for behaviour = un-scalable non-x-platform big ball of crap
I understand why people try so hard to do without JS, but if you want to implement certain UI features, you're SOL. Either give up on them, or embrace the pain.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#64What are the performance implications of using CSS animations versus Javascript? Say, if you were trying to make an application where page animations need to be extremely fast, like under 2ms for an experiment or test.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#65You might nod near internet, heck, you many not need staying alive, but here we are.
Seriously, after some minimum complexity the ability to create functions and loops its extremely important. As in you don't need a spoon and a knife to feed yourself, but it sure fucking helps.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#66You might not, but you probably do. The validation examples and input types are a case in point. Even on browsers where they work, the alerts can't be styled and the behaviors can't be controlled.
The form element type is perfectly enough for frontend validation.
You should do the rest on the backend anyway.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#67Am surprised no one has pointed out how bad these examples are for accessibility, no pause/play on the slider, hidden content that won't be read by screen readers etc.
I like the idea of using CSS over Javascript where it makes sense but in a lot of these examples it feels hacky.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#68What are the performance implications of using CSS animations versus Javascript? Say, if you were trying to make an application where page animations need to be extremely fast, like under 2ms for an experiment or test.
I believe animations are always faster when you use css instead of doing it with js.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#69The form validation is really cool!
But why oh why does it not validate before I press submit? Is that a Chrome specific thing?
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#70What are the performance implications of using CSS animations versus Javascript? Say, if you were trying to make an application where page animations need to be extremely fast, like under 2ms for an experiment or test.
I had always assumed that CSS is faster, till I read your question. A quick search gave me this interesting link - https://css-tricks.com/myth-busting-css-animations-vs-javasc... - check it out!