This is not the usual type of content you will have come to expect from Piccalilli, but I feel like this topic, specifically, is an important aspect of our work to cover because as I see it, making or encouraging your development staff to use AI tools in their work is extremely short-sighted and risky.I want to support that stance with some conversations I've had with people actually doing the work and their mostly less than favourable experiences.I asked this across question social media:Is your boss encouraging you to/making you use AI tools for development?I’m thinking about working on a piece about that onPiccalilli.It’s sensitive for sure, so more than happy for people to be anonymised.The reason I asked was because — as you can imagine — I speak with a lot of developers on a day-to-day basis. A lot of the time in my personal network, these are very experienced, senior developers, but I'm hearing the same stories from juniors too. It boils down to:My boss is making/encouraging me

I was listening to the latest Shoptalk Show episode and interpolate-size was mentioned, which triggered me to think "I wonder what's going on with that now".Not much, it seems. We're still looking way-off from it being in all browsers, but that's fine because we've got progressive enhancement available to us.What is interpolate-size?Why re-explain it when Bramus has already done an excellent job of that, over on the Chrome for developers blog?An often requested CSS feature is the ability to animate to height: auto. A slight variation of that request is to transition the width property instead of the height, or to transition to any of the other intrinsic sizes represented by keywords like min-content, max-content, and fit-content.We've been asking for this since before I even started writing CSS [checks notes] nearly 18 years ago [sobs].I noticed in Bramus' <details> demo — the exact use case of animating to auto height that sprang to my mind — is wrapping stuff in @supports.@supports (

I'll prefix that I don't know if a design pattern like masonry needs quite this much attention — I've always had it in my mind as a very specific answer to a very specific question: "how do we lay out various sized media?"Masonry is really useful for sites like Unsplash and Pinterest — galleries — but I'm not sure how useful it is away from that.But, it's great to see browser vendors trying to remove the need for JavaScript — often the tool of choice for a masonry layout — and bring that system to where it belongs: CSS.I've read both WebKit's first post about item-flow (which we also covered) and also, Chrome's display: masonry approach. I think based on what WebKit have expanded on with this latest post, vs. the narrower lens of Chrome's solution puts item-flow in the lead for me.The reason? I think item-flow presents more flexibility. WebKit are for sure, framing it as a way of achieving masonry buts that's also the key: a way. The item-flow approach brings wider improvements to both

I've been building some reporting tools recently for our course authors. Y'know, tables and summaries so they know how much their share of course sales are and how their sales are doing.Most of my work on this project was pulling data from Stripe and rendering it out appropriately. My efforts were focused less on the UI because in my mind, "I'll get Bootstrap on there or something."I'd heard of Pico before and I knew I had a strong semantic base in place already. I wanted to give it a chance before something like Bootstrap, so I just dropped Pico in there and the UI looked fantastic, immediately.I wish I could show you the outcome but for obvious legal reasons, I can't, but trust me, if you need a really nice global CSS base, Pico is very good.It aligns really well with how I like to operate in CSS. Global CSS is a big part of CUBE CSS. It's all about doing as much as possible as high up as possible. Pico does a great job of that.Check it out!

I want to make Piccalilli's position absolutely clear on LLMs and generative AI. I'll keep this extremely short because our feeds are already dominated by AI discourse.I just think it's important for you, the reader, to understand our position. This article serves as a canonical reference to our position ongoing.Where we stand: our principlesWe will never publish AI-generated content, be it words, code, video, audio and imagesWe won't boost content that we suspect has been wholly, or partially generated by AIContent submitted by guest authors that is wholly or partially generated by AI will be immediately rejectedHumans writing for humans, alwaysThat's what we do and what we will always do. We're not going to "optimise" for LLMs and crawlers. We'll continue to do everything to optimise for humans instead like hyper-focusing on the reading experience.Let's be honest, AI-generated content generally reads like complete trash and is a disservice to human readers. It would be offensive of u