Progressive disclosure defaults

When I wrote about my time in Amsterdam last week, I mentioned the task that the students were given:

They’re given a PDF inheritance-tax form and told to convert it for the web.

Rich had a question about that:

I’m curious to know if they had the opportunity to optimise the user experience of the form for an online environment, eg. splitting it up into a sequence of questions, using progressive disclosure, branching based on inputs, etc?

The answer is yes, very much so. Progressive disclosure was a very clear opportunity for enhancement.

You know the kind of paper form where it says “If you answered no to this, then skip ahead to that”? On the web, we can do the skipping automatically. Or to put it another way, we can display a section of the form only when the user has ticked the appropriate box.

This is a classic example of progressive disclosure:

information is revealed when it becomes relevant to the current task.

But what should the mechanism be?

This is an interaction design pattern so JavaScript seems the best choice. JavaScript is for behaviour.

On the other hand, you can do this in CSS using the :checked pseudo-class. And the principle of least power suggests using the least powerful language suitable for a given task.

I’m torn on this. I’m not sure if there’s a correct answer. I’d probably lean towards JavaScript just because it’s then possible to dynamically update ARIA attributes like aria-expanded—very handy in combination with aria-controls. But using CSS also seems perfectly reasonable to me.

It was interesting to see which students went down the JavaScript route and which ones used CSS.

It used to be that using the :checked pseudo-class involved an adjacent sibling selector, like this:

input.disclosure-switch:checked ~ .disclosure-content {
  display: block;
}

That meant your markup had to follow a specific pattern where the elements needed to be siblings:

<div class="disclosure-container">
  <input type="checkbox" class="disclosure-switch">
  <div class="disclosure-content">
  ...
  </div>
</div>

But none of the students were doing that. They were all using :has(). That meant that their selector could be much more robust. Even if the nesting of their markup changes, the CSS will still work. Something like this:

.disclosure-container:has(.disclosure-switch:checked) .disclosure-content

That will target the .disclosure-content element anywhere inside the same .disclosure-container that has the .disclosure-switch. Much better! (Ignore these class names by the way—I’m just making them up to illustrate the idea.)

But just about every student ended up with something like this in their style sheets:

.disclosure-content {
  display: none;
}
.disclosure-container:has(.disclosure-switch:checked) .disclosure-content {
  display: block;
}

That gets my spidey-senses tingling. It doesn’t smell right to me. Here’s why…

The simpler selector is doing the more destructive action: hiding content. There’s a reliance on the more complex selector to display content.

If a browser understands the first ruleset but not the second, that content will be hidden by default.

I know that :has() is very well supported now, but this still makes me nervous. I feel that the more risky action (hiding content) should belong to the more complex selector.

Thanks to the :not() selector, you can reverse the logic of the progressive disclosure:

.disclosure-content {
  display: block;
}
.disclosure-container:not(:has(.disclosure-switch:checked)) .disclosure-content {
  display: none;
}

Now if a browser understands the first ruleset, but not the second, it’s not so bad. The content remains visible.

When I was explaining this way of thinking to the students, I used an analogy.

Suppose you’re building a physical product that uses electricity. What should happen if there’s a power cut? Like, if you’ve got a building with electric doors, what should happen when the power is cut off? Should the doors be locked by default? Or is it safer to default to unlocked doors?

It’s a bit of a tortured analogy, but it’s one I’ve used in the past when talking about JavaScript on the web. I like to think about JavaScript as being like electricity…

Take an existing product, like say, a toothbrush. Now imagine what you can do when you turbo-charge it with electricity: an electric toothbrush!

But also consider what happens when the electricity fails. Instead of the product becoming useless you want it to revert back to being a regular old toothbrush.

That’s the same mindset I’m encouraging for the progressive disclosure pattern. Make sure that the default state is safe. Then enhance.

Have you published a response to this? :

Responses

Jon Lunman

@adactio Completely agree. Another analogy I like is the elevator vs escalator. If electricity fails, an elevator becomes useless. But an escalator just becomes stairs.

Also, the opposite of “display: none” isn’t always “display: block”. There could be other rules in the stylesheet that make it use “flex” or “grid”, perhaps at different breakpoints. So having the disclosure styles set “display: none” via “:not(:has(…))” is safer than the inverse.

# Posted by Jon Lunman on Wednesday, March 20th, 2024 at 5:01pm

2 Shares

# Shared by Giana ✨ on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 1:00am

# Shared by Ryan Townsend on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 1:01am

8 Likes

# Liked by Evil Jim O’Donnell on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:58am

# Liked by Tyler Sticka on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:58am

# Liked by Giana ✨ on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:58am

# Liked by John P. Green on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:59am

# Liked by Carlton Gibson 🇪🇺 on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:59am

# Liked by Jon Lunman on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:59am

# Liked by Ryan Townsend on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 12:59am

# Liked by nrk on Thursday, March 21st, 2024 at 1:00am

Related posts

Speaking at Web Day Out

Have you got the perfect talk for this event? Let me know!

Announcing Web Day Out

A one-day event all about what you can in web browsers today: Brighton, March 12th, 2026. Tickets are just £225+VAT!

Manual ’till it hurts

Try writing your HTML in HTML, your CSS in CSS, and your JavaScript in JavaScript.

Control

Trying to understand a different mindset to mine.

Bugblogging

Also, tipblogging.

Related links

CSS-in-JS: The Great Betrayal of Frontend Sanity - The New Stack

This is a spot-on analysis of how CSS-in-JS failed to deliver on any of its promises:

CSS-in-JS was born out of good intentions — modularity, predictability and componentization. But what we got was complexity disguised as progress.

Tagged with

The only frontend stack we should talk about

Explore the platform. Challenge yourself to discover what the modern web can do natively. Pure HTML, CSS, and a bit of vanilla JS…

Tagged with

Write Code That Runs in the Browser, or Write Code the Browser Runs - Jim Nielsen’s Blog

So instead of asking yourself, “How can I write code that does what I want?” Consider asking yourself, “Can I write code that ties together things the browser already does to accomplish what I want (or close enough to it)?”

Tagged with

Interop Feature Ranking

This is a nifty initiative:

This site lets you rank the proposals you care about, giving us data we can use when reviewing which proposals should be taken on for 2026.

For the record, here’s my top ten:

  1. Cross-document view transitions
  2. Speculation Rules API
  3. img sizes="auto" loading="lazy"
  4. Customizable/stylable select
  5. Invoker commands
  6. Interoperable rendering of HTML fieldset/legend
  7. Web Share API
  8. CSS scroll-driven animations
  9. CSS accent-color property
  10. CSS hanging-punctuation property

Tagged with

Optimizing PWAs For Different Display Modes — Smashing Magazine

There’s really good browser support for display-mode media queries and this article does a really good job of running through some of the use cases for your progressive web app.

Tagged with

Previously on this day

6 years ago I wrote Local

Think global, act local. In fact, just stay at home.

7 years ago I wrote CSS custom properties in generated content

They said it couldn’t be done.

15 years ago I wrote Reflection

A little bit of navel-gazing on this year’s geekout in Austin.

21 years ago I wrote Going up

My latest submission to the Mirror Project does quite a job at capturing the spirit of South by SouthWest.

21 years ago I wrote What's hot in Austin

Plenty of people have been writing about the contents of individual panels and presentations from South by SouthWest. I thought it might be interesting to give a broader overview and take a look at some recurring themes.

23 years ago I wrote No War On Monaghan

Let us hope that in the fog of war, no bombs intended for Iraq are used to bomb county Monaghan in Ireland.

24 years ago I wrote Pong: The Text-Based Game

There are many online emulators of classic arcade games.