Javascript

JavaScript Errors: An Introductory Primer

Published Jul 14, 2023

Updated Dec 21, 2023

6 min read

JavaScript Errors are an integral part of the language, and its runtime environment. They provide valuable feedback when something goes wrong during the execution of your script. And once you understand how to use and handle Errors, you'll find them a much better debugging tool than always reaching for console.log.

Why Use Errors?

When JavaScript throws errors, it's usually because there's a mistake in the code. For example, trying to access properties of null or undefined would throw a TypeError. Or trying to use a variable before it has been declared would throw a ReferenceError. But these can often be caught before execution by properly linting your code.

More often, you'll want to create your own errors in your programs to catch problems unique to what you're trying to build. Throwing your own errors can make it easier for you to interrupt the control flow of your code when necessary conditions aren't met.

Why would you want to use Error instead of just console.logging all sorts of things?

Because an Error will force you to address it. JavaScript is optimistic. It will do its best to execute despite all sorts of issues in the code. Just logging some problem might not be enough to notice it. You could end up with subtle bugs in your program and not know!

Using console.log won't stop your program from continuing to execute. An Error, however, interrupts your program. It tells JavaScript, "we can't proceed until we've fixed this problem". And then JavaScript happily passes the message on to you!

Using Errors in JavaScript

Here's an example of throwing an error:

throw new Error('Informative message about your error goes here');

When an Error is thrown, nothing after that throw in your scope will be executed. JavaScript will instead pass the Error to the nearest error handler higher up in the call stack. If no handler is found, the program terminates.

Since you probably don't want your programs to crash, it's important to set up Error handling. This is where something like try / catch comes in. Any code you write inside the try will attempt to execute. If an Error is thrown by anything inside the try, then the following catch block is where you can decide how to handle that Error.

try {
  if (someBadThingHappened) {
	  throw new Error('That bad thing happened!');
  }
} catch (error) {
  // Using console.error here is just an example of what
  // you might do. But you're free to write any error
  // handling logic you want!
  console.error(error); // logs "Error: That bad thing happened"
}

In the catch block, you receive an error object (by convention, this is usually named error or err, but you could give it any name) which you can then handle as needed.

Asynchronous Code and Errors

There are two ways to write asynchronous JavaScript, and they each have their own way of writing Error handling. If you're using async / await, you can use the try / catch block as in the previous example. However, if you're using Promises, you'll want to chain a catch to the Promise like so:

somePromise
	.then(handleResolvedPromiseFn)
	.catch(error => {
		// handle the error here
	})

Understanding the Error Object

The Error object is a built-in object that JavaScript provides to handle runtime errors. All types of errors inherit from it. Error has several useful properties.

message: Probably the most useful of Error's properties, message is a human-readable description of the error. When creating a new Error, the string you pass will become the message.
name: A string representing the error type. By default, this is Error. If you're using a built-in sub-class of Error like TypeError, it will be that instead. Otherwise, if you're creating a custom type of Error, you'll need to set this in the constructor.
stack: While technically non-standard, stack is a widely supported property that gives a full stack trace of where the error was created.
cause: This property allows you to give more specific data when throwing an error. For example, if you want to add a more detailed message to a caught error, you could throw a new Error with your message and pass the original Error as the cause. Or you could add structured data for easier error analysis.

Creating an Error object is quite straightforward:

// Here, we create a new Error with the new constructor
// and pass a string to it as the message.
const myError = new Error('Something went wrong');

// Will log "Error: Something went wrong" to the console in red.
// Includes a stack trace to show you where the error came from.
console.error(myError);

In addition to the generic Error, JavaScript provides several built-in sub-classes of Error:

EvalError: Thrown when a problem occurs with the eval() function. This only exists for backwards compatibility, and will not be thrown by JavaScript. You shouldn't use eval() anyway.
InternalError: Non-standard error thrown when something goes wrong in the internals of the JavaScript engine. Really only used in Firefox.
RangeError: Thrown when a value is not within the expected range.
ReferenceError: Thrown when a value doesn't exist yet / hasn't been initialized.
SyntaxError: Thrown when a parsing error occurs.
TypeError: Thrown when a variable is not of the expected type.
URIError: Thrown when using a global URI handling function incorrectly. Each of these error types inherits from the Error object and generally adds no additional properties or methods, but they do change the name property to reflect the error type.

Making Your Own Custom Errors

It's sometimes useful to extend the Error object yourself! This lets you add properties to particular Errors you throw, as well as easily check in catch blocks if an Error is of a particular type.

To extend Error, use a class.

class CustomError extends Error {
	constructor(message) {
		super(message);
		this.name = 'CustomError';
		this.foo = 'bar';
	}
}

try {
	if (someSpecialCircumstance) {
		throw new CustomError('My very own error!');
	}
} catch (error) {
	if (error instanceof CustomError) {
		console.log(error.message); // 'My very own error!'
		console.log(error.name); // CustomError
		console.log(error.foo): // 'bar'
	}
}

In this example, CustomError extends the Error class. It changes the name to CustomError and gives it the new property foo: 'bar'. You can then throw your CustomError, check if the error in your catch block is an instance of the CustomError, and access the properties associated with your CustomError. This gives you a lot more control over how Errors are structured and validated, which could greatly aid with debugging because your errors won't all just be Errors.

Common Confusions

There are many ways that using Errors can go subtly wrong. Here are some of the common issues to keep in mind when working with Error.

Failure to Catch

When an Error is thrown, the program will cease executing anything else in its scope and start working its way back up the call stack until it finds a catch block to deal with the Error. If it never finds a catch, the program will crash. So it's important to make sure you actually catch your errors, or else you might terminate your program unintentionally for small and recoverable issues.

It's especially helpful to think about catching errors when you're executing code from external libraries which you don't control. You may import a function to handle something for you, and it unexpectedly throws an Error. You should anticipate this possibility and ask yourself: "Should this code go inside of a try / catch block?" to prevent an error like this from crashing your code.

Network Requests Don't Throw on 400 and 500 Statuses

You might want to make a request to an API, and then handle an error if the request fails.

// ❌ This won't handle all of the things that might go wrong
const data = fetch('/some/api/endpoint')
	.then(res => res.json())
	.catch(error => console.error(error))

Maybe you made a bad request and got back a 400. Maybe you're not properly authenticated and got a 401 or 403. Maybe the endpoint is invalid and you get a 404. Or maybe the server is having a bad day and you get a 500.

In none of those cases will you get an Error!

From JavaScript's point of view, your request worked. You sent some data to a place, and the place sent you something back. Mission accomplished! Except it's not. You need to deal with these HTTP error statuses. So if you want to handle responses that aren't OK, you need to do it explicitly.

To fix the previous example:

// ✅ This will throw an error on a bad request
const data = fetch('/some/api/endpoint')
	.then(res => {
		if (!res.ok) {
			throw new Error(`Data fetch failed: ${res.statusText}`, { cause: res });
		}
		return res.json()
	})
	.catch(error => console.error(error))

You Can Throw Anything

You should throw new Errors. But you could throw 'literally anything'. There's nothing forcing you to only throw an Error. However, it's a lot harder to handle your errors if there's no consistency in what to expect in your catch blocks. It's a best practice to only throw an Error and not any other kind of JavaScript object.

This problem becomes especially clear in TypeScript, when the default type of an error in a catch block is not Error, but unknown. TypeScript has no way to know if an error passed into the catch is going to actually be an Error or not, which can make it more frustrating to write error handling code. For this reason, it's often a good idea to check what exactly you've received before trying to handle it.

try {
	// ...
} catch (error: unknown) {
	if (error instanceof Error) {
		// Handle the error.
	} else {
		// Do something else that doesn't assum you know
		// what type the error is.
		console.error(error)
	}
}

(Alas, you cannot throw 🥳. That's a SyntaxError. But throw new Error('🥳') is still perfectly valid!)

Conclusion

Wielding JavaScript Errors is a big upgrade from console.logging all the things and hoping for the best. And it's not very hard to do it well! By using Error, your apps will be much more explicit in how you expect things to work, and how you expect things might not work. And when something does go wrong, you'll be more likely to notice and better equipped to figure out the problem.

This Dot is a consultancy dedicated to guiding companies through their modernization and digital transformation journeys. Specializing in replatforming, modernizing, and launching new initiatives, we stand out by taking true ownership of your engineering projects.

We love helping teams with projects that have missed their deadlines or helping keep your strategic digital initiatives on course. Check out our case studies and our clients that trust us with their engineering.

About the author(s)

Tom VanAntwerp
@tvanantwerp @tvanantwerp

Exploring Angular Forms: A New Alternative with Signals

Exploring Angular Forms: A New Alternative with Signals In the world of Angular, forms are essential for user interaction, whether you're crafting a simple login page or a more complex user profile interface. Angular traditionally offers two primary approaches: template-driven forms and reactive forms. In my previous series on Angular Reactive Forms, I explored how to harness reactive forms' power to manage complex logic, create dynamic forms, and build custom form controls. A new tool for managing reactivity - signals - has been introduced in version 16 of Angular and has been the focus of Angular maintainers ever since, becoming stable with version 17. Signals allow you to handle state changes declaratively, offering an exciting alternative that combines the simplicity of template-driven forms with the robust reactivity of reactive forms. This article will examine how signals can add reactivity to both simple and complex forms in Angular. Recap: Angular Forms Approaches Before diving into the topic of enhancing template-driven forms with signals, let’s quickly recap Angular's traditional forms approaches: 1. Template-Driven Forms: Defined directly in the HTML template using directives like ngModel, these forms are easy to set up and are ideal for simple forms. However, they may not provide the fine-grained control required for more complex scenarios. Here's a minimal example of a template-driven form: ` ` 2. Reactive Forms: Managed programmatically in the component class using Angular's FormGroup, FormControl, and FormArray classes; reactive forms offer granular control over form state and validation. This approach is well-suited for complex forms, as my previous articles on Angular Reactive Forms discussed. And here's a minimal example of a reactive form: ` ` Introducing Signals as a New Way to Handle Form Reactivity With the release of Angular 16, signals have emerged as a new way to manage reactivity. Signals provide a declarative approach to state management, making your code more predictable and easier to understand. When applied to forms, signals can enhance the simplicity of template-driven forms while offering the reactivity and control typically associated with reactive forms. Let’s explore how signals can be used in both simple and complex form scenarios. Example 1: A Simple Template-Driven Form with Signals Consider a basic login form. Typically, this would be implemented using template-driven forms like this: ` ` This approach works well for simple forms, but by introducing signals, we can keep the simplicity while adding reactive capabilities: ` ` In this example, the form fields are defined as signals, allowing for reactive updates whenever the form state changes. The formValue signal provides a computed value that reflects the current state of the form. This approach offers a more declarative way to manage form state and reactivity, combining the simplicity of template-driven forms with the power of signals. You may be tempted to define the form directly as an object inside a signal. While such an approach may seem more concise, typing into the individual fields does not dispatch reactivity updates, which is usually a deal breaker. Here’s an example StackBlitz with a component suffering from such an issue: Therefore, if you'd like to react to changes in the form fields, it's better to define each field as a separate signal. By defining each form field as a separate signal, you ensure that changes to individual fields trigger reactivity updates correctly. Example 2: A Complex Form with Signals You may see little benefit in using signals for simple forms like the login form above, but they truly shine when handling more complex forms. Let's explore a more intricate scenario - a user profile form that includes fields like firstName, lastName, email, phoneNumbers, and address. The phoneNumbers field is dynamic, allowing users to add or remove phone numbers as needed. Here's how this form might be defined using signals: ` > Notice that the phoneNumbers field is defined as a signal of an array of signals. This structure allows us to track changes to individual phone numbers and update the form state reactively. The addPhoneNumber and removePhoneNumber methods update the phoneNumbers signal array, triggering reactivity updates in the form. ` > In the template, we use the phoneNumbers signal array to dynamically render the phone number input fields. The addPhoneNumber and removePhoneNumber methods allow users to reactively add or remove phone numbers, updating the form state. Notice the usage of the track function, which is necessary to ensure that the ngFor directive tracks changes to the phoneNumbers array correctly. Here's a StackBlitz demo of the complex form example for you to play around with: Validating Forms with Signals Validation is critical to any form, ensuring that user input meets the required criteria before submission. With signals, validation can be handled in a reactive and declarative manner. In the complex form example above, we've implemented a computed signal called formValid, which checks whether all fields meet specific validation criteria. The validation logic can easily be customized to accommodate different rules, such as checking for valid email formats or ensuring that all required fields are filled out. Using signals for validation allows you to create more maintainable and testable code, as the validation rules are clearly defined and react automatically to changes in form fields. It can even be abstracted into a separate utility to make it reusable across different forms. In the complex form example, the formValid signal ensures that all required fields are filled and validates the email and phone numbers format. This approach to validation is a bit simple and needs to be better connected to the actual form fields. While it will work for many use cases, in some cases, you might want to wait until explicit "signal forms" support is added to Angular. Tim Deschryver started implementing some abstractions around signal forms, including validation and wrote an article about it. Let's see if something like this will be added to Angular in the future. Why Use Signals in Angular Forms? The adoption of signals in Angular provides a powerful new way to manage form state and reactivity. Signals offer a flexible, declarative approach that can simplify complex form handling by combining the strengths of template-driven forms and reactive forms. Here are some key benefits of using signals in Angular forms: 1. Declarative State Management: Signals allow you to define form fields and computed values declaratively, making your code more predictable and easier to understand. 2. Reactivity: Signals provide reactive updates to form fields, ensuring that changes to the form state trigger reactivity updates automatically. 3. Granular Control: Signals allow you to define form fields at a granular level, enabling fine-grained control over form state and validation. 4. Dynamic Forms: Signals can be used to create dynamic forms with fields that can be added or removed dynamically, providing a flexible way to handle complex form scenarios. 5. Simplicity: Signals can offer a simpler, more concise way to manage form states than traditional reactive forms, making building and maintaining complex forms easier. Conclusion In my previous articles, we explored the powerful features of Angular reactive forms, from dynamic form construction to custom form controls. With the introduction of signals, Angular developers have a new tool that merges the simplicity of template-driven forms with the reactivity of reactive forms. While many use cases warrant Reactive Forms, signals provide a fresh, powerful alternative for managing form state in Angular applications requiring a more straightforward, declarative approach. As Angular continues to evolve, experimenting with these new features will help you build more maintainable, performant applications. Happy coding!...

Oct 4, 2024

5 mins

AngularJavaScript

Making Seamless Page Transitions with the View Transitions API

Make Seamless Page Transitions using the View Transitions API Traditionally web applications have always had a less polished experience, both functionally and visually speaking, compared to native applications on mobile and other platforms. This has been improving over the years with the introduction of new web APIs and standards. One such new API that bridges that gap is the View Transitions API. What is the View Transitions API? The View Transitions API is a new browser feature that allows developers to more easily create animated transitions between pages and views, similar to how mobile apps have transitions when navigating between pages. Adding view transitions to your application can reduce the cognitive load on your users and make the experience feel less inconsistent. One great thing about view transitions is that they can be used by both SPAs (single-page applications) and MPAs (multi-page applications) alike! Using the View Transitions API for SPAs Let’s see how we can use view transitions ourselves. We will use examples adapted from demos created by the wonderful Jake Archibald and Bramus. There are some alterations to a few of the examples to make them work with the newest version of the View Transitions API, but otherwise, they’re mostly the same. The process of getting view transitions working for SPAs is as simple as calling document.startViewTransition right before starting navigation and replacing your page’s content immediately after that. You need to make this call in your router or in an event listener that triggers your page navigation. The following is an example of how you can hook into page navigation in a vanilla JavaScript application. This example uses the Navigation API if it’s available. As of the time of writing this article only Chromium-based browsers support the Navigation API, but there is a fallback to using a click listener on link elements so that this works with Firefox and Safari. ` If you’re using a framework, then there’s probably a better way to do this specific to that framework than by using this contrived example. For example, if you are implementing usage of this API with a Next application, you may opt for something like next-view-transitions. For this article, we’re going to focus on the way this is done in vanilla JavaScript so that the fundamentals of using the API are understood. Knowing how it’s implemented in vanilla JavaScript should give you enough understanding to implement this in the framework of your choice if there isn’t already a library that does it for you. Now we have a way to know when a navigation is being requested. Using the above utility function we can start the animation and replace our content as follows: ` getMyPageContentSomehow can be any function that returns HTML. How that is implemented will depend on your application and framework of choice. If you want to run these examples on your machine, the demo repository has instructions in its README. In essence, it’s as simple as hosting an HTTP server at the root of the project and visiting localhost. No fancy build system is required! By default, a fade is done that only lasts for a moment. The animation that happens can be configured using CSS with the ::view-transition-group pseudo-element on the element you want to animate, which in our case is the entire page, and we pass in root. ` Given that the animation properties are used, you have much control over what kind of animation to do. You can change the duration and the interpolation, add keyframes and gradients, and even add image masks. You can learn more about the animation properties in CSS on MDN. Using the View Transitions API for MPAs As mentioned, view transitions also work for MPAs with no client-side routing. Setting up view transitions for MPAs is much easier than for SPAs. All you have to do is include the CSS rule on all pages where you want the animations. ` Of course, like how it works with SPAs, you can customize the animations to your heart’s content using the view transition pseudo-elements. Conclusion I hope this article helped you understand the fundamentals of using the View Transitions API. Now that most browsers support it and it’s not too difficult to add it to existing applications, it is a great time to learn how to use it. You can view a full list of examples here (made by Jake Archibald and Bramus) if you want to see how advanced the animations can get. I like the Star Wars ones especially. The README explains how to get all the examples up and running (a total of 43!)....

Aug 2, 2024

4 mins

JavaScript

Introduction to Zod for Data Validation

As web developers, we're often working with data from external sources like APIs we don't control or user inputs submitted to our backends. We can't always rely on this data to take the form we expect, and we can encounter unexpected errors when it deviates from expectations. But with the Zod library, we can define what our data ought to look like and parse the incoming data against those defined schemas. This lets us work with that data confidently, or to quickly throw an error when it isn't correct. Why use Zod? TypeScript is great for letting us define the shape of our data in our code. It helps us write more correct code the first time around by warning us if we are doing something we shouldn't. But TypeScript can't do everything for us. For example, we can define a variable as a string or a number, but we can't say "a string that starts with user_id_ and is 20 characters long" or "an integer between 1 and 5". There are limits to how much TypeScript can narrow down our data for us. Also, TypeScript is a tool for us developers. When we compile our code, our types are not available to the vanilla JavaScript. JavaScript can't validate that the data we actually use in our code matches what we thought we'd get when we wrote our TypeScript types unless you're willing to manually write code to perform those checks. This is where we can reach for a tool like Zod. With Zod, we can write data schemas. These schemas, in the simplest scenarios, look very much like TypeScript types. But we can do more with Zod than we can with TypeScript alone. Zod schemas let us create additional rules for data parsing and validation. A 20-character string that starts with user_id_? It's z.string().startsWith('user_id_').length(20). An integer between 1 and 5 inclusive? It's z.number().int().gte(1).lte(5). Zod's primitives give us many extra functions to be more specific about *exactly* what data we expect. Unlike TypeScript, Zod schemas aren't removed on compilation to JavaScript—we still have access to them! If our app receives some data, we can verify that it matches the expected shape by passing it to your Zod schema's parse function. You'll either get back your data in exactly the shape you defined in your schema, or Zod will give you an error to tell you what was wrong. Zod schemas aren't a replacement for TypeScript; rather, they are an excellent complement. Once we've defined our Zod schema, it's simple to derive a TypeScript type from it and to use that type as we normally would. But when we really need to be sure our data conforms to the schema, we can always parse the data with our schema for that extra confidence. Defining Data Schemas Zod schemas are the variables that define our expectations for the shape of our data, validate those expectations, and transform the data if necessary to match our desired shape. It's easy to start with simple schemas, and to add complexity as required. Zod provides different functions that represent data structures and related validation options, which can be combined to create larger schemas. In many cases, you'll probably be building a schema for a data object with properties of some primitive type. For example, here's a schema that would validate a JavaScript object representing an order for a pizza: ` Zod provides a number of primitives for defining schemas that line up with JavaScript primitives: string, number, bigint, boolean, date, symbol, undefined, and null. It also includes primitives void, any, unknown, and never for additional typing information. In addition to basic primitives, Zod can define object, array, and other native data structure schemas, as well as schemas for data structures not natively part of JavaScript like tuple and enum. The documentation contains considerable detail on the available data structures and how to use them. Parsing and Validating Data with Schemas With Zod schemas, you're not only telling your program what data should look like; you're also creating the tools to easily verify that the incoming data matches the schema definitions. This is where Zod really shines, as it greatly simplifies the process of validating data like user inputs or third party API responses. Let's say you're writing a website form to register new users. At a minimum, you'll need to make sure the new user's email address is a valid email address. For a password, we'll ask for something at least 8 characters long and including one letter, one number, and one special character. (Yes, this is not really the best way to write strong passwords; but for the sake of showing off how Zod works, we're going with it.) We'll also ask the user to confirm their password by typing it twice. First, let's create a Zod schema to model these inputs: ` So far, this schema is pretty basic. It's only making sure that whatever the user types as an email is an email, and it's checking that the password is at least 8 characters long. But it is *not* checking if password and confirmPassword match, nor checking for the complexity requirements. Let's enhance our schema to fix that! ` By adding refine with a custom validation function, we have been able to verify that the passwords match. If they don't, parsing will give us an error to let us know that the data was invalid. We can also chain refine functions to add checks for our password complexity rules: ` Here we've chained multiple refine functions. You could alternatively use superRefine, which gives you even more fine grained control. Now that we've built out our schema and added refinements for extra validation, we can parse some user inputs. Let's see two test cases: one that's bound to fail, and one that will succeed. ` There are two main ways we can use our schema to validate our data: parse and safeParse. The main difference is that parse will throw an error if validation fails, while safeParse will return an object with a success property of either true or false, and either a data property with your parsed data or an error property with the details of a ZodError explaining why the parsing failed. In the case of our example data, userInput2 will parse just fine and return the data for you to use. But userInput1 will create a ZodError listing all of the ways it has failed validation. ` ` We can use these error messages to communicate to the user how they need to fix their form inputs if validation fails. Each error in the list describes the validation failure and gives us a human readable message to go with it. You'll notice that the validation errors for checking for a valid email and for checking password length have a lot of details, but we've got three items at the end of the error list that don't really tell us anything useful: just a custom error of Invalid input. The first is from our refine checking if the passwords match, and the second two are from our refine functions checking for password complexity (numbers and special characters). Let's modify our refine functions so that these errors are useful! We'll add our own error parameters to customize the message we get back and the path to the data that failed validation. ` Now, our error messages from failures in refine are informative! You can figure out which form fields aren't validating from the path, and then display the messages next to form fields to let the user know how to remedy the error. ` By giving our refine checks a custom path and message, we can make better use of the returned errors. In this case, we can highlight specific problem form fields for the user and give them the message about what is wrong. Integrating with TypeScript Integrating Zod with TypeScript is very easy. Using z.infer<typeof YourSchema> will allow you to avoid writing extra TypeScript types that merely reflect the intent of your Zod schemas. You can create a type from any Zod schema like so: ` Using a TypeScript type derived from a Zod schema does *not* give you any extra level of data validation at the type level beyond what TypeScript is capable of. If you create a type from z.string.min(3).max(20), the TypeScript type will still just be string. And when compiled to JavaScript, even that will be gone! That's why you still need to use parse/safeParse on incoming data to validate it before proceeding as if it really does match your requirements. A common pattern with inferring types from Zod schemas is to use the same name for both. Because the schema is a variable, there's no name conflict if the type uses the same name. However, I find that this can lead to confusing situations when trying to import one or the other—my personal preference is to name the Zod schema with Schema at the end to make it clear which is which. Conclusion Zod is an excellent tool for easily and confidently asserting that the data you're working with is exactly the sort of data you were expecting. It gives us the ability to assert at runtime that we've got what we wanted, and allows us to then craft strategies to handle what happens if that data is wrong. Combined with the ability to infer TypeScript types from Zod schemas, it lets us write and run more reliable code with greater confidence....

Nov 15, 2024

7 mins

JavaScriptZod

Understanding the Difference Between `:focus` and `:focus-visible` in CSS

Understanding the Difference Between :focus and :focus-visible in CSS I have learned my fair share about the importance of keyboard accessibility, so I know that visual indication of the focused element is very important. But the well-known :focus pseudo-class is not always the best fit for this job. That's where :focus-visible comes in. Let's look at the differences between these two pseudo-classes and explore the best practices for using them effectively. What is the :focus Pseudo-Class? The :focus pseudo-class is a CSS selector that applies styles to any element that receives focus, regardless of how that focus was triggered. This includes focus events from keyboard navigation, mouse clicks, and touch interactions. Example Usage of :focus ` In this example, the button will display a blue outline whenever it is focused, whether the user clicks on it with a mouse, taps it on a touchscreen, or navigates to it using the keyboard. What is the :focus-visible Pseudo-Class? The :focus-visible pseudo-class is more specialized. It only applies styles to an element when the browser determines that the focus should be visible. This typically occurs when the user navigates via the keyboard or assistive technologies rather than through mouse or touch input. Example Usage of :focus-visible ` Here, the button will only show a blue outline when focused through keyboard navigation or another input method that usually requires visible focus indicators. Key Differences Between :focus and :focus-visible :focus - Behavior: Applies to any element that receives focus, regardless of the input method. - Use Cases: Ensures that all interactions with the element are visually indicated, whether by mouse, keyboard, or touch. :focus-visible - Behavior: Applies styles only when the focus should be visible, such as using a keyboard or assistive technology. - Use Cases: Ideal for scenarios where you want to provide focus indicators only to keyboard and assistive technology users while avoiding unnecessary outlines for mouse and touch users, typically required by design. Accessibility Implications :focus - Pros: - Guarantees that all users can see when an element is focused, which is critical for accessibility. - Cons: - Can lead to a suboptimal experience for mouse users, as focus styles may appear unnecessarily during mouse interactions. :focus-visible - Pros: - Enhances user experience by showing focus indicators only when necessary, thus keeping the interface clean for mouse and touch users. - Tailors the experience for keyboard and assistive technology users, providing them with clear visual cues. - Cons: - Additional considerations may be required to ensure that focus indicators are not accidentally omitted, especially in older browsers that do not support :focus-visible. - There may be cases where you want to show focus indicators for all users, regardless of input method. Best Practices for Using :focus and :focus-visible To achieve the best accessibility and user experience, combining both :focus and :focus-visible in your CSS is often a good idea. Combining :focus and :focus-visible ` Here is a Stackblitz example of what such styling could look like for you to try out and play with. Additional Tips - Test with Keyboard and Assistive Technology: Ensure that your web application is navigable using a keyboard (Tab, Shift + Tab, etc.) and that focus indicators are visible for those who rely on them. It's never a bad idea to include accessibility testing in your e2e testing suite. - Provide Clear Focus Indicators: Make sure that focus indicators are prominent and easy to see. A subtle or hard-to-spot focus indicator can severely impact accessibility for users who rely on keyboard navigation. Conclusion The :focus-visible pseudo-class offers a more refined way to manage focus indicators, improving accessibility and user experience, particularly for keyboard and assistive technology users. By understanding the differences between :focus and :focus-visible, and applying best practices in your CSS, you can create more accessible and user-friendly web applications. Remember, accessibility should never be an afterthought. By thoughtfully applying focus styles, you ensure that all users, regardless of how they interact with your site, can easily navigate and interact....

Nov 8, 2024

3 mins

AccessibilityCSSPlaywright

Let's innovate together!

We're ready to be your trusted technical partners in your digital innovation journey.

Whether it's modernization or custom software solutions, our team of experts can guide you through best practices and how to build scalable, performant software that lasts.

JavaScript Errors: An Introductory Primer

Why Use Errors?

Using Errors in JavaScript

Asynchronous Code and Errors

Understanding the Error Object

Making Your Own Custom Errors

Common Confusions

Failure to Catch

Network Requests Don't Throw on 400 and 500 Statuses

You Can Throw Anything

Conclusion

Tom VanAntwerp

You might also like

Exploring Angular Forms: A New Alternative with Signals

Making Seamless Page Transitions with the View Transitions API

Introduction to Zod for Data Validation

Understanding the Difference Between `:focus` and `:focus-visible` in CSS

Let's innovate together!

You might also like

Exploring Angular Forms: A New Alternative with Signals

Making Seamless Page Transitions with the View Transitions API

Introduction to Zod for Data Validation

Understanding the Difference Between `:focus` and `:focus-visible` in CSS