After a brief overview of CSS browser compatibility concerns, which wrapped up Codecademy’s Learn Intermediate CSS curriculum, I looked at what remained under Codecademy’s HTML/CSS umbrella and started their Learn Color Design course. This is a less technical course more focused on art & design perspectives, so I knew it would take more effort for me to grasp all the concepts.

At least they started easy (for me) by going over HSL versus RGB for specifying color, and how HSL is easier to work with from a color design perspective. This is something I had learned from working with Pixelblaze and most of the concepts transfer easily. But then we moved quickly into concepts I had never encountered before, like designing color schemes. I liked the fact that the course material stayed with a same example page and changed colors around to illustrate monochromatic, complementary, analogous, and triadic color schemes. Keeping the content identical and changing just the color did help me see the effect somewhat, even if I am not familiar with the kind of vocabulary used. For example, I don’t know what it means for a color scheme to “create a sense of equality, vibrancy, and security in your designs”. These “Color Psychology” concepts are very foreign to my brain and will take time to absorb. Some of the vocabulary is new to me, too, using familiar words in unfamiliar ways. There was a quiz question “How is a shade of a color produced” and none of the possible answers made sense to my brain until I returned to course material and reviewed how the vocabulary is defined in this specific context.

This course had a gem of a quote that I wished more web designers took to heart:

Remember that most users skim websites! They are not reading every word and checking every menu—you need to guide the user to the most important content with good color choices.

Like the lecture, the practice exercise gave us a site that was mostly grayscale and had us add color to it. The instruction ends with an encouraging “Now our site is looking great!” but it really doesn’t. I have yet to master the subtleties in choosing colors and to compensate I intend to use color schemes built by others as much as I could. But this course gave me some foundation so I could appreciate those prebuilt color schemes. It also helped me appreciate BrandColors, a collection of color schemes associated with many brands we see in our everyday lives.

There was an optional resource that pointed to Adobe Color with the claim “you will learn to use Adobe Color” but when clicking the link, I was redirected straight to the color wheel tool. It’s not immediately obvious where I could find anything instructional to help me learn, I think that URL might be outdated. The same “dropped into a tool with no instructions” problem applied to another optional resource, a color tool by CloudFlare Design. (Not to be confused with the CloudFlare that handles DDoS attacks.)

After some experimentation with color, we are to put that theory into practice by applying color for UI. Again, the instruction materials used a sample page that started out mostly grayscale and we added colors as we go. UI-specific concepts are added, such as using colors for button hover and disabled states. An aside: I wish this class discussed the fact that hover is absent from touchscreens and how design should change in response. And speaking of wishes, an earlier wish was granted here: we finally have a discussion on color blindness and given ColorSafe as a tool to help. Another realization I had during this course is that we never really had a discussion on CSS pseudo-classes, which we use to style things like hover states. A quick web search found this MDN resource as a starting point for later research. For now, I will proceed to the navigation design course.

Web developers must keep in mind not everyone can see and interact with a site in the same way. This is not just a fundamental of web accessibility, but also the fact there are many different web browsers out there running on a huge range of hardware platforms. They won’t all have the same capabilities, so with that fact in mind we proceed to “Learn CSS: Browser Compatibility“.

The first and most obvious topic is CanIUse.com, our index for features supported in various browsers and an invaluable resource. After that, the course talks about how different browsers have different default style sheets. There are reference resources to see what they are, and there exist tools to mitigate differences with a “normalized” or “reset” stylesheet. But if we simply can’t (or won’t) stay within standardized subset, we can use “prerelease” features via vendor prefixes. Either manually or via automated toolsl like Autoprefixer. This is the first of many tools within a whole category called “polyfill” that implements newer features in a backwards compatible way, making user experience more consistent across older/less supported browsers. I knew there were polyfill tools for transpiling new JavaScript features to run on browsers with older JavaScript engines, but I hadn’t know there were CSS polyfill tools as well. Perhaps I needed to pull in one of them to run Angular on Windows Phone? Codecademy pointed to Modernizr and Polyfill.io as starting points to explore the world of polyfills.

Polyfill tools run at development time to decide what to do. But what if we can adjust CSS at runtime? This is the intent of CSS Feature Query, whose syntax looks a lot like CSS Media Query but for browser CSS feature support. Using this feature, however, is a bit of a Catch-22. Not all browsers support CSS Feature Query and obviously those browsers wouldn’t be able to tell us as such via the very mechanism that we’d use to ask for such information. This impacts how we’d write CSS using feature queries, and a likely place for bugs. Finally: we’d need some ability to debug feature query issues via browser developer tools, but a quick web search came up empty.

---

Completion of this course also gave me Codecademy completion credit for their “Learn Intermediate CSS” course, which is a packaged compilation of the following set of courses I took individually:

1. Learn CSS: Flexbox and Grid
2. Learn CSS: Transitions and Animations
3. Learn CSS: Responsive Design
4. Learn CSS: Variables and Functions
5. Learn CSS: Accessibility
6. Learn CSS: Browser Compatibility

But Codecademy had even more web styling classes beyond this package! I proceeded onward to learn color design.

During Codecademy’s “Learn CSS: Variables and Functions” course, I was mildly disappointed to learn that CSS custom properties and fixed calculation functions were far less powerful than I had mistakenly thought from the course title. No matter, they are sufficient for their intended purpose, and they are valuable tools for building pages that are inclusive to all users. Which is why the next class in Codecademy’s CSS curriculum is “Learn CSS: Accessibility.“

First up is the size of text, the most significant factor in typographical design. This is a deep field with centuries of research from the print world, Codecademy can’t cover them all and correctly doesn’t try. We do get a bit of coverage on font-size, line-height, and letter-spacing. One oddity: a conversation on paragraph width introduces the CSS unit “ch” with 1ch being width of the zero character. (“0”) This allows specifying lengths in a way that scales with the font, but that sounds like what “em” does as well. A quick search didn’t find why we would use “ch” vs. “em”.

Another topic was color and contrast. The expected color wheel discussion talks about selecting different colors with high contrast, but it didn’t talk about color blindness. The course linked to a contrast checker tool by WebAIM, but it didn’t mention color blindness, either. A quick search on WebAIM site found a page for color blindness, but it is incomplete. The page ends with an example: a train map where routes are represented by colors. The page tells us that the different routes would be difficult to tell apart for the color-blind, but it doesn’t give us a solution to the problem! My guess? Maybe we can use different line styles?

This section also taught me there is a semantic HTML tag for denoting abbreviations.

<abbr title='Cascading Style Sheets'>CSS</abbr>

I don’t think this should be classified as an accessibility measure because it would be helpful for all audiences. This information is certainly available to screen readers, but there is some visual indication on a normal rendering. My browser renders it as dotted underlined text by default. (“user agent stylesheet”)

abbr[title] {
    text-decoration: underline dotted;
}

Another topic I didn’t think should be classified as accessibility is a discussion on changing rendering for print media. This should have been part of the media queries course, but at least the concepts make sense. When the user is printing out a web page, we can do things like hiding a navigation bar that wouldn’t have done anything on a sheet of paper. This course also talks about printing the URL of a link, because you can’t click on a sheet of paper.

@media print {
  a[href^='http']:after {
    content:  ' (' attr(href) ')';
  }
}

However, this would only work for short URLS that can be reasonably typed in by hand. Many links of the modern web have long URLS that are impossible to accurately type in by hand. But on this vein, I think it would be worthwhile to print out the content of <abbr> tags as well.

Anyway, back to accessibility and screen readers. A section asserts that there are frequently items that are not useful for a screen reader and should be hidden. I think I understand the concept, but I thought the example was poor: In case of duplicate text, one of them could be hidden from screen readers with the aria-hidden='true' attribute. But it seems like the real fix is to remove duplicate text for all audiences! Another problem is this introduction of aria-hidden without saying anything more about it. A quick web search found this is just the tip of an iceberg called the Accessible Rich Internet Applications specification.

After the lecture, we are encouraged to read “Start Testing for Accessibility.” A short overview of several accessibility testing tools: Lighthouse, WAVE, Axe, and Accessibility Insights.

I know I have a lot to learn about web accessibility, not the least of which is learning about other ARIA properties. But there’s another side to the “not everyone sees the same web page as you do” problem: browser compatibility.

Following responsive design in Codecademy’s CSS curriculum is “Learn CSS: Variables and Functions“. I was intrigued by the title of this course, as “variables” and “functions” were features unexpected in a visual appearance style description syntax. I associate them with programming languages! Does their presence mean CSS has evolved to become a programming language in its own right? After this class, I now know the answer is a definite “no”.

First of all, CSS “variables” are far less capable than their programming language counterparts. The name isn’t even really accurate, as a value does not vary (hence not variable) after it is set. A value declared by one CSS rule can be overridden by a more specific CSS rule declaring something with the same name, but that’s more analogous to variable scope than actually varying its value. This mechanism is also known as CSS custom properties, and I think that is a much more accurate name than “variable” which oversells its capabilities.

That said, CSS custom properties have their uses. This course showed several cases where custom properties can be overridden by CSS rules to good effect. The first example I found very powerful is combining custom properties and media queries. It makes for a far cleaner and more maintainable way to adjust a stylesheet based on screen size changes. The second significant example is in the exercise project, where we could create multiple themes on a web page (Light Mode/Dark Mode/Custom Mode) using custom properties.

Moving on to “CSS functions”, I was disappointed to learn that we’re talking about a fixed set of data processing/calculation functions implemented by the runtime environment. We can’t actually declare our own functions in CSS. CSS functions are nowhere as powerful as C++ functions. They’re not even as powerful as Microsoft Excel functions, as CSS style sheets are not spreadsheets.

Like almost every standard associated with HTML, we see a specification that tried to rationalize a lot of ad-hoc evolution and failing to hide all of the seams. The one inconsistency that annoys me is the fact some function parameters must be separated by commas, and other functions require parameters to be separated by spaces. It is especially jarring when the two styles are used together, as in this example used in the course:

filter: drop-shadow(10px 5px 0.2rem rgba(236, 217, 203, 0.7));

The drop-shadow() parameters are separated by spaces, while the rgba() parameters are separated by commas. What a mess! How can we be expected to keep this straight? Still, these functions should suffice to cover most of the intelligence we’d want to put in a style sheet. I was most impressed that calc() tries to handle so much, including the capability to mix and match CSS units. I know the intent is to allow things like subtracting a pixel count from a percentage of width, but I see a debugging nightmare. The course covered only a subset of the set of functions, but of those that were covered my favorite is clamp(). I expect to use that a lot.

One unanswered mystery is the class recommends that we set global custom properties using :root pseudo-class as the specifier. The instruction said this is usually the <html> tag, without explaining exceptions to that rule. When is :root not <html>? The MDN documentation unfortunately doesn’t answer that question either. I’ll have to leave it as a mystery as I proceed to learn about web accessibility.

Following a quick tour through CSS transition animations, next course on the Codecademy CSS curriculum is “Learn CSS: Responsive Design“. Up until this point, Codecademy CSS curriculum had primarily demonstrated concepts using unit measurement of pixels. This course brings us into the real world where pages have to adjust themselves to work well on devices ranging from 4.5″ cell phone screens to 32” desktop monitors.

The first focus is on typography, since most pages are concerned with delivering text for reading. Two measurements work based on font size: em is relative to the base font size of a particular point in the HTML tree, varying relative to its hierarchy. rem ignores the hierarchy and goes directly to root <html>.

Next, we move on to percentages, which are calculated based on the parent width of an element. There were a few paragraphs dedicated to how height calculations are based on parent width instead of parent height, but I didn’t understand why. There was an example of how parent height could be affected by child height so using percentages would cause a circular reference problem, which I understood. But wouldn’t the same problem occur on the width dimension as well? We can specify child width as dependent on parent width, and parent width dependent on contents (child width.) Why wouldn’t this cause the very same circular dependency? I don’t understand that part yet.

When I first started trying to write a HTML-based UI for controlling SGVHAK and Sawppy rovers, I learned of a chunk of HTML that I needed to put into phone-friendly HTML. I didn’t understand what it meant, though, it was just “copy and paste this into your HTML”.

<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">

With this class I finally got this item checked off the “need to go and learn later” list. Codecademy even included a pointer to a reference for viewport control. This viewport control reference mentioned a few accessibility concerns, but I don’t really understand them yet. I expect to learn more HTML accessibility soon as it is listed later in Codecademy CSS curriculum.

Viewport led into media queries, another essential tool for pages to dynamically adjust between desktop, tablet, and phone usage. Most of the examples reacted to viewport width, which I understand to be the case most of the time in the real world. But this barely scratched the surface of media features we can query for. The one most applicable to my rover UI project is the “orientation” property, because that will let me reposition the virtual joystick when the phone is held in landscape mode.

Most of this course consisted of making changes in CSS then manually resizing our browser window to change viewport width and observe its effects. But again, width is but one of many media features that can be queried, and it’s not obvious how we can explore most of the rest. I wish this course included information on how to test and debug media query issues using browser developer tools. Such a walkthrough was quite informative in the JavaScript course and its absence here is sorely missed. A quick web search found the Media Query Inspector which looked promising at first glance, I’ll have to dig into that later. For now, it’s onwards to Codecademy’s CSS Variables and Functions.

After an interesting and occasionally challenging time with Codecademy’s “Learn CSS: Flexbox and Grid” course, I followed their recommended CSS curriculum onward to “Learn CSS: Transitions and Animations“. It was an interesting and worthwhile unit, and thankfully shorter than the previous course on flexbox + grid. This is in part helped by a narrower scope: the CSS animation system does not attempt to cover all possible animations anyone may want to put on screen. It only animates a specified subset of CSS properties, but doing so covers majority of animation effects useful for adding visual interest and improving the user experience. As opposed to early HTML <BLINK>, a design misstep which definitely did not improve user experience.

Every animation system shares some fundamentals: what to change, where+when to start, where+when to stop, and how to move between start and stop points. That’s quite a few parameters to change and managing them quickly becomes cumbersome as the number of adjustable knobs increase. But CSS animation has a narrow scope, limiting the complexity somewhat. It also has a benefit: the start and stop state are specified by existing CSS mechanisms, leaving the transition system to deal with the animation-specific parameters.

This actually plays into an advantage of using CSS shorthand, which usually annoys me as presenting multiple ways to describe the same thing. Here multiple transition parameters can be collapsed into a single transition. It has all the annoyances of shorthands: it is another way to describe the same thing, and it requires memorizing an arbitrary order of parameters. But here transition has an advantage. We have the option to list multiple transitions in a comma-separated list and they will all execute simultaneously when triggered. The course called this “chaining” animations. I don’t know if the word “chain” was part of CSS specification or just a word choice by the author of this Codecademy course, but I found it misleading because “chain” implies animations that run consecutively (one after the other) instead of all animations running simultaneously in parallel.

Another way to specify multiple animations that run simultaneously is to specify “all” as the animated property. (The “what to change” parameter.) This would apply the same animation duration, easing function, and timing delay to all transitions that apply to an element. This is possible because the start & stop states were specified elsewhere in CSS. I see this as a very powerful mechanism in an “easy to shoot myself in the foot” kind of power. By specifying “all” we commit to animating all applicable property changes now and in the future. Which certainly means surprising behavior in the future when we add another change then surprised to see it animate. Followed by a debugging session that ends with “Oh, this transition applied to ‘all’.”

One thing I did not see is a way to create animated transitions between different layouts, for example when triggered by mechanisms covered in the CSS Responsive Design course. Perhaps that is not a scenario the CSS people deemed important enough?

After I took Codecademy’s “Learn CSS” course, I figured out it packaged together four shorter courses. Some of these short lessons were all material I’ve learned before and are just a review, so I flew through them quickly enough that putting together in a single “Learn CSS” made sense to me. This situation changed dramatically for the next item on the list: “Learn Intermediate CSS” is again a packaging of several shorter courses, except now the material is new to me and started with CSS flexbox. This was a new and challenging concept for me to grasp, so now I’m in favor of going by the shorter courses instead of the (now quite hefty) package.

Learn CSS: Flexbox and Grid covers the first two lessons of Learn Intermediate CSS. As soon as we started with CSS flexbox I could tell it was a powerful tool. However, this particular course fell short of the normal Codecademy standards. For each function of flexbox, we run through simple illustrative examples, which is good. Unfortunately, these small examples were too simplified for me to understand how they would be applied. In other words, we see a lot of small pieces but the course never pulled them together in a bigger picture.

My personally attempt at summarizing flexbox is: a CSS construct that attempts to capture rules for laying out child elements in a way that is flexible to changes in screen size and aspect ratio. Since there’s no way to capture every possible way to lay things out, the subset supported by flexbox thus becomes a de-facto prescription of best-practice layout from the people who designed this CSS feature. Nevertheless, there are more than enough (possibly too many) knobs we can adjust to build a layout.

While going through the simple examples, I did see certain values that appealed to my personal style. They were, however, usually not the default value. For example, when covering justify-content I thought space-between (evenly distribute available space between elements, spread across available width, leaving no wasted space at left and right edges) looks best, but the default value is actually flex-start (pack elements to the start of flow (left) and leaving empty space to the end (right)). I understand choosing a default value is challenging and I’m ignorant of many of the concerns that went into a final decision. Sometimes the default behavior to “makes sense” are actually inconsistent. For example, the default flex-shrink value is 1, but its counterpart flex-grow has a default value of 0.

After the chaos of JavaScript shorthands, I thought I was freed from that thinking in CSS. No such luck. To specify dynamic scaling behavior in a flexbox, somebody thought it would be useful to combine flex-grow, flex-shrink, and flex-basis parameters into a single flex shorthand. As a beginner, I am not a fan of memorizing an arbitrary order of numbers, but maybe I’ll grow to love it.

The feature of flexbox that most surprised me is ability to flip its two axis with flex-direction. Not only would this let us build right-to-left layouts (for Hebrew, Arabic, etc.) this even hints at the ability to build layout for traditional Chinese layout. (Words top-to-bottom in a column, then columns laid out right-to-left.)

The Codecademy project for flexbox “Tea Cozy” is simultaneously really great and really awful. They gave us a set of images, most of which are pictures to use in a layout except one image which is actually the specification for laying out a page. So we are given a picture of what the result should look like, including some key dimensions, and told to go make it happen. I understand this is highly representative of the workflow of a web developer in charge of laying out a page according to a design specification, so that is really great. But given this course has been short on the “why” of things (each lesson is “do X and Y” instead of the much more useful “Do X and Y to accomplish Z.”) it was difficult to figure out which of the tools we just learned were applicable. I faced a wide knowledge gap between course material and building “Tea Cozy”. Still, I enjoyed the challenge of this exercise. And for better or worse, I did come out of “Tea Cozy” with a better understanding of flexbox.

---

Outside of Codecademy, I was told about Flexbox Froggy, an interactive game for teaching flexbox. It was fun and the frogs were cute. I doubt anyone could learn the full power of flexbox just from playing this game but seeing how some of the concepts were applied was good review after my course.

---

The next lesson introduces CSS grid, for layouts where regular spacing makes more sense than the dynamic rules of flexbox. Laying out elements in a grid was very familiar to me, it reminded me of the early days of HTML where I would hack a layout using <TABLE>. The bad news for me is that shorthand-itis is even worse for grid. We started with grid-template-rows and grid-template-columns, then we learn the two can be shortened to grid-template. Similarly, row-gap and column-gap become gap.

Aside: I was annoyed we didn’t have consistency on whether column/row are used as prefix or suffix for these parameters.

Back to the shorthand infestation: Not only do we have shorthand, now we have multiple levels of shorthand. We start with grid-row-start and grid-row-end, which are shortened in grid-row. But that’s not all! Their was the expected counterparts grid-column-start and grid-column-end shortened to grid-column. Then grid-row and grid-column — already shorthand themselves — are shortened into grid-area. Gah!

But CSS grid has more to offer over <TABLE> than just annoying shorthand, it also has ability to control justification and alignment of elements within the grid. But the names of these control knobs are pretty unintuitive and confusing. While I can see how justify-item controls justification of items inside a grid, I don’t understand why justify-content moves the entire grid. Why is the entire grid considered ‘content’? Adding to this confusion is justify-self, which is how an item inside the grid can override justification settings from the container grid. I look at all of this and think “here be dragons.”

I had hoped the project associated with grid would be as hands-on as “Tea Cozy” but it was “merely” laying out the grid in a to-do list, far more straightforward than “Tea Cozy”. Ah well.

---

Outside of Codecademy: the people who made Flexbox Froggy also made Grid Garden.

---

After this instructive though occasionally challenging course, CSS Transitions and Animations felt a lot easier.

After going through Codecademy courses on HTML and JavaScript, the next obvious step for me was to visit the third pillar of the modern web: CSS. There’s a bit of weirdness with the class listing, though. It seems Codecademy is reorganizing offerings in this area. I took the “Learn CSS” class listed at the top of their HTML/CSS section and afterwards, I discovered it was actually a repackaging of several smaller CSS courses.

• Learn CSS: Introduction
• Learn CSS: Box Model and Layout
• Learn CSS: Colors
• Learn CSS: Typography and Fonts

Either that, or the reverse: Learn CSS course is being split up into these multiple smaller courses. I’m not sure which direction it is going, but I expect this is a temporary “pardon our dust while we reorganize” situation. The good news is that their backend tracks our progress through this material, so we get credit for completing them no matter which course was taken.

Anyway, onward to the material. CSS determines how things look and lets us make our pages look better even if we don’t have professional design skills. My first nitpick had nothing to do with appearance at all: in the very first introductory example, they presented a chunk of HTML with DIV tags for header, content, and footer. My first thought: Hey, they didn’t use semantic HTML and they should!

Most of the introductory material was vaguely familiar from my earlier attempts to learn CSS. I hadn’t known (or had forgotten) that attribute selectors had such a wide range of capabilities, almost verging on regular expressions. The fancier pattern matching ones seem like they could become a runtime performance concern. Selector chaining (h1.destination covers all H1 tags with class=”destination”) is new to me, as was descendant combinator (.description h5 covers all H5 tags under something (not the H5) with class=”description”). I foresee lots of mistakes practice keeping them straight alongside multiple selectors (.description,h5 covers H5 tags and tags with class=”description” equally, without requiring any relation between them.)

In the realm of box model and layout, I have never found the default HTML content box model to be intuitive to my brain. I always thought of the border and padding as part of the element, so I expect I’ll have better luck using box-sizing: border-box; instead for my own layouts. What I don’t expect to have a luck with is positioning. I’ve played with this before and relative/absolute/fixed/sticky always felt like voodo magic I didn’t fully understand. It’ll take a lot more practice. And a lot more examining of behavior in browser development tools. And if that fails, there’s always the fallback layout debug tool of putting a border around everything:

* { border: 1px solid red !important; }

And finally, I need more practice to get an intuitive grasp of how to specify values in CSS. Most of this course used pixels, but it would be nice to design style sheets that dynamically adjust to content using other units like em or rem. (Unrelated: this URL is in the MDN “Guides” section which have other helpful-looking resources.) I also want to make layouts dynamic to the viewport. We have a few tools to obtain such values: vw is viewport width, vh is viewport height, vmin is the smaller of the two, vmax is the larger of the two. On paper vmin+vmax can tell me if the screen is portrait or landscape, but I haven’t figured out the logic for a portrait layout vs. landscape layout. Perhaps that is yet to come in later Codecademy CSS courses.