HTML Can Do That(chrisburnell.com)
452 pointsby encyclopedismAug 19, 2026

39 Comments

yurishimoAug 19, 2026
Just a heads up but datalist is not really a great solution if you need a strong contract. The user can still type whatever they want into the field and there is no fuzzy filtering or typo mitigation. Once you add those requirements, a library that gives you a more fully featured combobox is likely going to make a lot of sense in your project.
sarchertechAug 20, 2026
There’s still browser/OS typo mitigation.
vlucasAug 20, 2026
Very true, and ran into this one specifically myself when going down the "HTML can do this!" road. HTML can NOT, in fact, replace a good combobox with search input. Datalist has significant shortcomings. I wound up using a React island for this single input inside otherwise normal HTML, despite my own objections, because it really it just that much better than the native options.
reaperducerAug 20, 2026
That's the whole sanitize vs. validate argument debate that keeps coming up.

How you handle it is project-dependent. But if you're doing a real web site, not an SPA, you can show an error/help page, or re-load the current page with the error/help message.

Arch-TKAug 20, 2026
This is specifically about good UX not about security, validation, or sanitisation.
yurishimoAug 20, 2026
For sure; and it will continue to be an issue as long as we allow old browsers to exist. I’m definitely not saying you shouldn’t have backend validation, just highlighting where the frontend validation provided by the browser is not as universal as it might appear on the surface.

FWIW I find the native date picker to also still be quite poorly performing in practice, despite quite robust browser support. I wish it worked better but for many reasons, I still see plenty of users (or bots?) who submit dates in the wrong format for whatever reason. My current hypothesis is largely focused on password managers though since they will often do whatever they want directly in the value attribute of an input element.

GroxxAug 20, 2026
Wow, yeah - years later and I still get nothing in Firefox, and support is quite spotty in general (and clearly still buggy): https://caniuse.com/?search=datalist

Hard pass, that's essentially unusable.

totallygeekyAug 20, 2026
I've been tooling with site for years now and I'm always shocked at what can be done with raw HTML. These are some really neat examples, some work a bit funny when it comes to mouse vs. arrow key functionality though (in particular the dropdown/autocomplete), I'm wondering if that's an Edge specific issue or Chromium.
jdlshoreAug 20, 2026
The “hidden until found” feature surprised me. What’s the use case for something like that?
dofmAug 20, 2026
Looks like it's basically like a one way show-hidden mechanism, but the browser's built-in search will pop it open on matches.

So you could use it for additional notes, things like "view pricing terms" or "show exclusions" on product listings — stuff people need to read only when they need to read it — without it being hidden from them if they search for it.

seki285Aug 20, 2026
One thing that comes to mind is JS-less image preview, clicking on an image thumbnail reveals the full preview.
dspillettAug 20, 2026
Though that wouldn't have a method of closing the full image afterwards, if you have a few thumbnails and want one full to be open at a time (closing when the next is selected).
wvbdmpAug 20, 2026
Pretty cool! I’ve been using <details> for this. One example would be a collapsible tree hierarchy of our organization that you can CTRL+F and still find collapsed teams and people. Or an accordion, or anything collapsible, really.
dspillettAug 20, 2026
It won't be an intended use case, but it might be a convenient place to put poisoned content for the “benefit” of scrapers…

Though humans will accidentally find it too, so using a details tag with appropriate summary as a warning would be more friendly than just hidden content. It'll still get opened, but the user at least has a way of closing it again afterwards.

Also before using it I'd want to check what old UAs including accessibility tools tend to do when they hit a value that they don't recognise for the hidden="" attribute - would what they don't recognise as a valid value result in defaulting to the content being hidden or visible/read/other?

pseudosavantAug 20, 2026
There is a common accessibility pattern where the first tab focusable item is a "Skip to content" link in the top left corner. The link is initially hidden until you tab to it. That is the only use case I could think of when checking it out.
akerstenAug 20, 2026
On a big page with lots of collapsed content, I want control+f to search it and find anything in the collapsed sections without having to manually expand them all before I hit control+f
megaman821Aug 20, 2026
I use it for tabbed content. That way search will reveal the tab and content on page search match.
jamescunAug 20, 2026
I'm that minutia in your statistics that is still rocking NoScript in 2026, enabling JavaScript on a site-by-site basis, but this is increasingly difficult with the modern web.

Hopefully these and others modern HTML features gain adoption, along with realizing perhaps a Single Page Application isn't necessary in most instances.

I don't often have to write frontend code, but when I do, there is very little in terms of interactivity you cannot do with HTML these days, worst case a little sprinkle of something like HTMX.

bee_riderAug 20, 2026
Thank goodness you exist, the fingerprinters will be confused as to which one of the two of us went to their website!
jamescunAug 20, 2026
How? There are dozens of us! DOZENS!
Perz1valAug 20, 2026
How would you count?
steanneAug 20, 2026
"you don't have to, they'll tell you."

(+1)

jccalhounAug 20, 2026
i'm right there with you!
gunalxAug 20, 2026
Single page applications are one of the most anoying web patterns i know of. Please just let me have one page for each ting to do so i actually can bookmark it properly.
phyzix5761Aug 20, 2026
Once backend and frontend became two separate teams frontend people didn't want to keep asking backend to make logic changes for state, so frontend took things into their own hands. The mistake was making it two separate teams.
ThunderSizzleAug 20, 2026
Ive made SPAs in Blazor that make it a point to update the URL whenever a "navigation" occurs. I also made it a point to ensure refreshing or loading the URL restored the state.

It's a small problem compared to the ease of use for development you can gain via Blazor, so I don't see any reason not to solve it.

tyreAug 20, 2026
This is possible and, in my experience building them, the norm. SPAs have routers and update navigation state, including history for browser Back/Forward
gunalxAug 20, 2026
Yes true. But also way to often neglected.
culiAug 20, 2026
On the other hand, converting a SPA to a PWA is often a breeze
djoldmanAug 20, 2026
oh my. Looks like NoScript is way better than what I've been using. Thanks!

https://noscript.net/

zelphirkaltAug 20, 2026
This is part of how I judge how well made or how shitty a website is. If it requires scripts from a dozen third parties, then it usually sucks and one can easily recognize when not much effort has been put into making it.
evenhashAug 20, 2026
One thing you notice running NoScript is how prevalent Google is.

Even if a site doesn’t monetize with Google Ads, there’s a decent chance it’s pulling a script from ajax.googleapis.com, and Google still knows that you visited the site from the Referer of the script download.

nozzlegearAug 20, 2026
Does HTMX work with NoScript? Doesn't it require JS?
ipsodAug 20, 2026
Nope, doesn't work. Doesn't stop you from making it a PWA, though.
edparcellAug 20, 2026
I got frustrated with sites that should just be documents bolting on a pile of javascript libraries, third-party requests etc so I made a standard for sites that are just documents, and wrote a checker for document-only pages. For SSL, the thing that actually changed the web was browsers flagging non-SSL - probably similar is needed here. https://certifiedweb10.org/ if you're interested.
hyperhelloAug 20, 2026
I don’t understand why the group invented these new attributes and methods of action for dialogs that don’t seem relevant to anything else. Was there some silly patent to work around?
esprehnAug 20, 2026
As opposed to what? Not sure what the alternative you're picturing is.
hyperhelloAug 20, 2026
popovertarget="example-dialog" popovertargetaction="hide"

It’s all binding. This is what JavaScript is for: dynamic content.

AachenAug 20, 2026
Input fields are dynamic elements. Textareas can be resized. Pages can be scrolled. Why implement everything anew in custom code if it can be implemented once per browser engine in native code, native UI, and expected/homogenous UX?
hyperhelloAug 20, 2026
I mean the action and target attributes don’t seem to appear anywhere else but the popover api. I’m in favor of HTML dialogs, I just don’t see the point in the trend of making everything into this declarative nightmare it’s becoming when we have onclick=dialog.show() without even quotes.
esprehnAug 20, 2026
Script attributes are very often disabled for security reasons.

The declarative actions API is currently only used for popover, but it's been discussed for over a decade to allow SSR of rich content that's interactive before script loading. See also https://developer.chrome.com/blog/command-and-commandfor

For a long time I also pushed back on these interactive APIs because script is a better primitive and every site seems to have quirky requirements. I've come around on it though because there's huge demand for SSR again and businesses are seeing the value in very fast TTI.

I do still think the date picker API is a disaster. Everyone actually needs something much richer than the system date picker. Travel websites want ranges. People want to put dots and day highlights. I wish they'd fix that next.

hakessonAug 20, 2026
Yeah, I'm a great fan of both HTML and CSS "can do that". I find more useful things on the CSS side like :has, keyframes and container queries. Why duplicate code when you have it for free :)
Sohcahtoa82Aug 20, 2026
Yeah I've seen a page that described a whole bunch of things you can do with CSS. So many animation options!
dematzAug 20, 2026
This comment by yurishimo should not be [dead], imo

>Just a heads up but datalist is not really a great solution if you need a strong contract. The user can still type whatever they want into the field and there is no fuzzy filtering or typo mitigation. Once you add those requirements, a library that gives you a more fully featured combobox is likely going to make a lot of sense in your project.

It is true! HTML can do a lot of cool stuff, it might get you 100% of the way depending on what you're doing. But if you have a lot of forms where users pick from a value set, and want to enforce no other strings and get a good search experience, datalist does not get you there.

GualdrapoAug 20, 2026
I seem to recall there was a proposal to add such thing to <select>s
bulderAug 20, 2026
I definitely remember seeing a post by a Chromium maintainer talking about starting development on a proof of concept implementation and surveying for semantics.
kotaKatAug 20, 2026
(iirc if you have [showdead] on you can click on the timestamp to the comment and will get a [vouch] option as a reverse-flag, fwiw. i see it and don't have showdead enabled, so enough people have re-vouched it!)
honrAug 20, 2026
I mildly disagree. You still have to validate what the browser gives you. The user could have edited the "strong contract" using browser dev tools.

So, let the user type, then validate in javascript if you want instant feedback (by changing colors, say, to red / orange), but ideally don't fully block it from being seen by the server. And do the real validation on the server side. This is what I found to be fairly robust, while allowing mitigations if a bad rollout breaks something (delivering to clients is slower than updating something on the server side, most often).

c-hendricksAug 20, 2026
That solves the validation portion, but not the rest of the UX issues
yurishimoAug 20, 2026
Where did I say to forgo backend validation? Of course you validate on the backend as well, but the better UX would be to prevent the user from entering a bad value to begin with, assuming it fits within your team’s performance budget.

I’m not advocating for willy-nilly package inclusion, just highlighting a current shortcoming of datalist that is often not mentioned in these sorts of articles.

jonahxAug 20, 2026
GP was addressing the client-side UX, not backend validation, which is an orthogonal concern.
yurishimoAug 20, 2026
Thanks for the vouch! The rest of the article was indeed good but I find a lot of value in hacker news comments precisely because someone comes back to the comments and lays out why what I just read might need a different perspective. If you just want to see cool stuff that a browser can technically do, we are all capable of reading the Chrome dev blog, but we come to HN for a wider perspective. Someone telling a war story about how some little tidbit came back to bite them is also valuable (imo).
bingemakerAug 20, 2026
<img> also supports "srcset" which can make the image component responsive. Hope they add a placeholder to it which can account for loading state.
yoz-yAug 20, 2026
I think it’s neat but at the same time I’m cautious about implementing an “almost feature” in what’s supposed to be a declarative language.

Now everybody needs to support it and nobody can really use it.

I’m talking about the features in work like media controls on dialog buttons.

hk__2Aug 20, 2026
Related to this, I’d love that HTML natively support sortable tables. This is a common need but every single time I have to reimplement it.
krappAug 20, 2026
That's what javascript is supposed to be for. All of this is what javascript is supposed to be for.

HTML describes layout, CSS describes style, JS adds interactivity.

Want sortable tables? Get a jquery plugin and spend five minutes, done.

This was all solved a decade or more ago.

zephenAug 20, 2026
> HTML describes layout

News to me.

krappAug 20, 2026
That's understandable, because almost no one actually works with HTML directly anymore, but it's true. HTML contains tags like <H> for headers, <p> for paragraphs, <br> for line breaks <pre> for prerendered text, <ol> and <ul> for ordered and unordered lists, <table> for tables as well as <main>,<div>,<header>,<section>,<nav>,<article>,<aside>,<summary> and <footer> to both explicitly and implicitly describe the layout of an HTML document. In fact, "HTML" itself is an acronym (HyperText Markup Language) in which the "Markup" describes the function of HTML to "mark up" text in a similar way that editors once did in the print industry, describing which parts of the text should be bold, italicized, etc. or divided up and in what way.
crab_galaxyAug 20, 2026
HTML describes the structure of a document, not really the layout.

If HTML had <inline> <block> <column> <row> or <grid> tags, sure. But CSS determines the layout via display/position properties.

krappAug 20, 2026
<span> is inline

<div> is block

<table>,<tr> and <td> are your grid, row and column.

CSS improves on describing layout with positioning but HTML was still doing that before CSS even came along.

hk__2Aug 20, 2026
> Want sortable tables? Get a jquery plugin and spend five minutes, done.

I want sortable tables without having to rely on a third-party plugin to a third-party library. HTML describes content, not just layout. It would be a `sortable` attribute on the table, just like you already have attributes that have nothing to do with layout such as `autocomplete` or `aria-*`.

krappAug 20, 2026
Everyone already complains that browsers are too bloated and now you want to have every browser support sortable tables when a single, simple JS file would work?
ducktectiveAug 20, 2026
>single, simple JS file

It's all fine and dandy until marketing bros decide to shove all kinds of shady modals into that JS file. The JS side is not exclusive to trivial interactivity.

krappAug 20, 2026
What "marketing bros?"

It's open source software. You can see what it does, and you just put it on your server. We're talking about pre NPM technology here, everything is vendored and local and no one is going to change that file without your knowledge and permission. And if someone does, you have much bigger problems on your hands.

What you can't own and control is the browser vendors and how they choose to implement things, or not to. You can edit a JS file to your specific needs, but you're stuck with whatever the browser decides.

wild_eggAug 20, 2026
You want client side table sorting?

It's really easy to do this with server rendered HTML. Put a link with the sort param in the column headers and be done.

mxuribeAug 20, 2026
I used to do this in the early 2000s! Some folks back then would ask whether i was afraid that clicking a link (which loads a "new" web page) would slow things down and create an awful experience for users...but, my team and I would really focus on keeping web pages slim/lightweight to begin with...so it rarely was a problem. I don't think we were geniuses or anything like that, but keeping things light (always and from the beginning) enabled us to "cheat" (like this "hack" of the links in the column headers) in ways that were beneficial but with very low risk. Sometimes it took an extra moment or two at the beginning of an effort...but it ALWAYS paid off down the road, and in many different ways.
wild_eggAug 20, 2026
It still works exceptionally well in 2026 and generally creates better and faster experiences than an SPA with far, far less code.
culiAug 20, 2026
I hate what it does to my back button
hnal943Aug 20, 2026
HTMX is the solution
zarzavatAug 20, 2026
So instead of using JS to sort the table directly, now you make a JS fetch() request to sort the table?!

It does make sense in one situation, if the table is a large server-side paginated one and the sorting is really an ORDER BY clause. But for a basic table that fits entirely on the client, it doesn't make sense at all. There are tiny JS libraries that will make <table>s sortable when you add a particular class name.

nozzlegearAug 20, 2026
Trading one javascript for another?
hk__2Aug 20, 2026
You don’t need an SPA for that; Wikipedia has client-side sorted tables for example.
xboxnolifesAug 20, 2026
I want tables that can be sorted on multiple columns without triggering a page refresh on every click.
wild_eggAug 20, 2026
View Transitions are your friend
hahn-kevAug 20, 2026
I feel like there's so few times it would actually work how I want it that it seems like there's little point.
jwrAug 20, 2026
This is… not obvious. It's only easy if you want the simplistic approach of sorting lexicographically or numerically. But in more complex tables, you will often encounter cases where the data representation for sorting is different from data representation for display.

Of course most JavaScript-based tables get this wrong, too.

hk__2Aug 20, 2026
You could have a `sortkey` attribute, a bit like <option> that has a `value` attribute in case the value you want is different from the value you display.
dansalvatoAug 20, 2026
I had always thought that table sorting seems like the perfect job for HTML, given its data-driven nature, and the possibility of implementing sort information into the attributes of table cell elements.

But thinking about it: Is there a precedent for HTML to be able to include information that instructs the device to present the DOM out of order? Maybe it's out of scope for HTML to have information about presentation order, when the order is supposed to be implied strictly by the DOM hierarchy itself.

Of course, CSS can visually reorder stuff (e.g. `order` on flex/grid items), but MDN has accessibility warnings regarding the use of `order` and visually presenting the data in an order not reflected by the DOM. So, maybe sorting is best done by reordering the DOM after all.

aitchnyuAug 20, 2026
Saw Grouped <details>, ctrl+F'd the hidden content and it opened and highlighted the text in Firefox. Was waiting for this fix ever since I learned about details.
culiAug 20, 2026
You can also control this behavior for almost any hidden element with the `hidden="until-found"` attribute

https://css-tricks.com/covering-hiddenuntil-found/

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/...

silvestrovAug 20, 2026
I'd really wish I could force ISO format for the date input as the current "platform native" is confusing for some users when the OS use a different language than the web page that is shown.

For some multi-country companies it makes sense to have all admin pages in English no matter the underlying OS language. Imagine sending a screenshot where the OS date format is different from what everybody else expects from an English page.

hk1337Aug 20, 2026
I'd be okay with regional date format for the user but it always submits as ISO 8601 date format.
croteAug 20, 2026
That's already how it works, is it not?
croteAug 20, 2026
Alternatively: have the <time> element actually do something by hooking it up to the new Moment API and having it display the specified timestamp in the user's locale. That would at least provide an easy way to have the input format and the display format be the same.

But yes, there's also a very good argument to be made in favor of having such localized elements follow the content's `lang` attribute - potentially with a `lang="initial"` to reset it to "whatever the user has configured for their OS".

jimmygrapesAug 20, 2026
Dealing with this right now. Got some people whose devices are set to display dates as dd/mm/yyyy and the janky pay submission form records it verbatim rather than translate to its internal mm/dd/yyyy format. If it's invalid date it will reject, but a guy submitted for August 4 and got denied for the system recording it as April 8. Spreadsheet MS Forms nonsense. Nobody cares.
hollowturtleAug 20, 2026
An "HTML Can't Do That" would be hundreds pages long, and at the pace of getting features like dialogs every decade we're limiting ourselfs on any further development and creating serious apps. It wasn't created for apps, it was created for light document formatting. When we will pretend a drawing api we can call directly from webassembly? Outside of web ui frameworks are doing just fine and way better and more performantly than html and dom
gear54rusAug 20, 2026
> When we will pretend a drawing api we can call directly from webassembly?

Hopefully, never. There's enough ad-blocking arms race as it is.

hollowturtleAug 20, 2026
You confuse marketing websites with productivity apps, google docs, figma and many more already render on a canvas using webassembly or not. It's a matter of exposing the right tools
CodesInChaosAug 20, 2026
What I'd like to see are searchable drop-downs (not to be confused with text input with suggestions).

And the date/time picker controls are too limited for many applications.

AachenAug 20, 2026
Do I understand that first one correctly as datalist without allowing the user to submit a value not on the list?
CodesInChaosAug 20, 2026
That, and how it's rendered needs to be separate from the value the the input gets. Just like `<option value="123">John Doe</option>` or ideally even rich html like `<option value="123"><small>123</small> John Doe</option>`.

I guess the best way to render it would be exactly like `<select>` when closed, but when opened there should be a search box where it'd normally show the first option.

Clicking search would call a javascript function, which could then adjust the set of available options via the standard DOM APIs.

Alternatively they could add support for a special element `<selecthead>` which can contain whatever you want, which would render fixed at the when the drop down is opened and can be interacted with like normal html elements. Then you could place your own search fields inside.

bellowsgulchAug 20, 2026
The older I get, the less I want to use new browser features that have already been somehow possible with existing ones that typically have been around for literal decades.

Adopting them makes a future with multiple browser engines more labor intensive and unlikely as the number of standards targets one is required to support grows and it becomes a game of asking yourself what sites you want your browser to support.

If you don't have a lot of experience in web software, you might think, that's a silly thing to think about, but I think it's that level of maybe exceptional thoughtfulness that has really profound ramifications. If you do have a lot of experience in web software and you think it's silly to think about, you suck.

hk1337Aug 20, 2026
The only one not mentioned I think should be utilized more is properly names in html forms. Everyone has gotten used to just doing things in javascript when a lot of times if you name the fields in a correct way, you can do a simple form post and let the backend validate it with little to no modifications (hopefully none if you did it correctly).

I think the big issue with some of items listed is not all the browsers either implement it or they implement it differently. I'm sure your first instinct will be Safari but Chrome, while it may implement a lot, tends to do it quite different than the others. The date picker in browsers is one feature that comes to mind.

stagasAug 20, 2026
I started textlog.cc as an experiment to see how far I can go without introducing JS. It turns out, pretty far! If you exclude the Web Push notifications which required a Service Worker script, all the rest is server-side rendered React. As a visitor, with all the hover cards and popovers you would think there is some JS going on, but it’s all HTML-only. I am enjoying very much the constraint and it hasn’t hindered any progress. It’s a proof a lot can be achieved by just HTML.
mabiniAug 20, 2026
Just because you can, it doesn't mean you should
AachenAug 20, 2026
Exactly. Why reïmplement features in JS just because you can? Waste of effort and usually a worse user experience!

Wait, that wasn't what you meant?

hendurhanceAug 20, 2026
Most people use divs for everything now. This is a breath of fresh air.
nobleachAug 20, 2026
With the exception of using divs for things that have a more appropriate element. Buttons for example - for the love of all that is holy - when I see an onclick handler and aria attributes on divs, I think, "couldn't you have restyled the button??"
xboxnolifesAug 20, 2026
Even worse, using buttons everywhere that you should use an a href.
teddyhAug 20, 2026
encomAug 20, 2026
>popover

Why are we cool with popups again? Anything that interrupts and blocks content is annoying, and is nearly guaranteed to make me leave immediately. It can be used responsibly, but it almost never is.

vazarkAug 20, 2026
It is commonly used in dashboards when you want a confirmation dialog
yipinwongAug 20, 2026
JS has been in front-line for these functionalty, and HTML has been dog-slow to catch up with slow standardization (not based on usage more academical) and recommendations.

HTML can do that. yes. but adoption? welp, I don't really care nor will I use it unless I have to. I will use whatever was available in practice and continue to use them.

afavourAug 20, 2026
Odd to both complain about adoption and out yourself as someone unwilling to move to a better solution because it’s less familiar. What do you expect the answer to be here?
werdnapkAug 20, 2026
<details> is still not animatable?
esprehnAug 20, 2026
You can animate it now. There's no default though which is a bit annoying. I wish we had made it animate open/closed smoothly.

https://austingil.com/animating-details-element-with-only-cs...

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/S...

adzmAug 20, 2026
It is! Add css animation to the ::details-content pseudo element
cushAug 20, 2026
It's weird that the pure html dialog still doesn't handle inertness yet
metalliqazAug 20, 2026
What on Earth is hidden-until-found for?
devinhades333Aug 20, 2026
This page loads so slow it did not evenwork for me. guess html was not enough
dajonkerAug 20, 2026
Popover, dialog, invoker commands, our entire production app uses these everywhere and it works really well! The fact that dialogs and popovers are rendered on the "top layer" and that nested popovers are also automatically stacked on top of each other and have 'cascading close' shows how well these standards were designed.

The only hard thing is still to position a popover near the element that triggers it, such as when you want to create a context menu that has to render above/below the button that triggered it. There is anchor positioning in CSS now but support is still limited and I find it hard to wrap my head around.

LLMs are also terrible at these new standards. If they even know about them, they often think they're not baseline yet and they have almost zero training data compared to the giant mountain of weird JS and CSS that people had to use before the introduction of these standards.

sublinearAug 20, 2026
I'm curious how many people are involved in the design of your app and what their concerns are.

Testing for accessibility and on mobile devices has a tendency to derail the best intentions. What tools are you using for those concerns? I'm not asking because I need advice. I'm asking because I want to know what you or your team did.

nozzlegearAug 20, 2026
> The only hard thing is still to position a popover near the element that triggers it, such as when you want to create a context menu that has to render above/below the button that triggered it. There is anchor positioning in CSS now but support is still limited and I find it hard to wrap my head around.

I was going to suggest anchor positioning. I found it difficult to wrap my head around too, but once it clicks it's pretty simple. As a bonus, you can use it to position many other things than just popovers.

commandlinefanAug 20, 2026
> often think they're not baseline yet

I'm not an LLM, but that was my immediate thought - how new does a browser have to be to support these and which browsers am I excluding by using these features?

jxfAug 20, 2026
Support is pretty good in general for these. Click any of the element links in the article and you get taken to the support grid.
zuzululuAug 20, 2026
ngl i was surprised for the modal dialogs i always thought we needed javascript as i have been doing so forever with jquery

a bit off topic but wish we could bring back <frames> and <tables>. just good old fashioned stuff from the late 90s

florianherrengtAug 20, 2026
I’m a big fan of simple things but I always go back to using a library or framework because it’s much easier to create a good, consistent UX
peesemAug 20, 2026
once again, i will ask: why do people care so much about only having one <details> element open at a time? let me see what i want to see!
220hertzAug 20, 2026
Here we all are in 2026, talking about HTML, like madmen.
dawnerdAug 20, 2026
I use most of these but the one that somehow slipped past me was the name attribute for details. That's going to be incredibly useful. I want to go rip out all of the js accordions now.
ChadNauseamAug 20, 2026
my personal favorite, although css not html, is “field-sizing: content”. Finally with iOS 26 we can have input fields that expand to fit the content
DweditAug 20, 2026
Grouped Details example really needs a hand cursor. An "I" cursor for selecting text doesn't tell you that an element is interactible.
prinny_Aug 20, 2026
I eagerly await the day we can fully style the date & time component so that we can put all those JS libraries to (a well deserved) rest.
underdeserverAug 20, 2026
Loved the Zelda reference.
br0cephAug 20, 2026
js is web remote code execution. we need to return to an html only browser world.

theres no reason for a browser to be an OS/compiler/abi, for remote code.

this is the dumbest shit in the history of computers. why didnt everyone have they torches and pitchforks, when web2.0 became a thing?

t1234sAug 20, 2026
HTML did <select> since inception but that didn't stop people from trying to reinvent it using <div> and a bunch of JS.

All these great built in features, especially typeahead, wont be mainstream until they can be excessively styled.

vips7LAug 20, 2026
Isn’t that because select wasn’t style-able?
waltboszAug 20, 2026
The color input looks different depending on your browser and OS. https://master.dev/blog/the-color-input-the-color-picker/

Firefox uses the native OS color picker, which in Windows 11 still looks unchanged from Windows 95.