Chapter 2. CSS

Share your questions, comments, and ideas about the CSS chapter of the Web Almanac…

1 Like

It could be great to gather some data on unused CSS (which drags performance and sustainability down).

1 Like

Small correction

(e.q., mm , in , cm ),

should be a g not a q :smiley:
And yes, I wasn’t aware the q-unit existed.
My guess for the usage percentage would be wordpress.

2 Likes

@zcorpan noted that something weird was going on with the Q unit:

I filed this issue to investigate and I think there was a bug in the query that falsely counted base64 gibberish. I’ve rerun the query with a fix and we’ll be updating the chapter accordingly.

@bodo the typo you found is also in this section so we’ll get that fixed as well. Thank you!

1 Like

Guys, thank you for the great overview! I am just beginning my story with CSS and thanks to your article already have an idea what to learn.

2 Likes

The HTML survey acknowledged the sample bias problem of tags in the survey because of the uniqueness of homepages and their typical tags. In the CSS case I wonder given the frameworks being a 25%+ how much of the data is a function of the weight of the way the competency of the framework authors is being recounted versus what vanilla CSS writers tend to do. I think you would see a very different answer if you subsetted to just vanilla CSS and compared. TL;DR - web platform knowledge is very unevenly distributed and the repeat count of authored libraries and their tactics likely significantly skews the data suggesting more awareness than there likely is.

On a more !important note :rofl: how could use miss sampling the usage of everyone’s favorite/hated kludge? Seriously though !important might be quite interesting esp compared to the library thing mentioned above (with and without the frameworks)

Look forward to more data analysis coming soon.