In the PageSpeed Insight report for my site, it's listing all of my css files as "render-blocking resources". My css links all look like this:
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all" href="https://example.com/something.css" />
In the documentation, it says <link rel="stylesheet"> tags are listed as render-blocking stylesheets if they don't have a media attribute that matches the user's device. Since my stylesheets all have media="all", why are they getting listed as render-blocking resources?
The documentation is very misleading.
What they are trying to say is they will not flag something as render blocking if you have a media query that matches the users device only (so a max or min width or an orientation for example).
However even then they will flag it under 'critical CSS' and even if they don't flag it, it is still render blocking if that CSS is required for the 'above the fold' content.
Further down the page you linked in your question they explain it slightly better
Another approach to eliminating render-blocking styles is to split up
those styles into different files, organized by media query. Then add
a media attribute to each stylesheet link. When loading a page, the
browser only blocks the first paint to retrieve the stylesheets that
match the user's device.
That part is the important part, they are trying to get you to put your mobile styles in one style sheet, desktop in another so you only load the bear minimum CSS to render the page initially.
What really matters
Ignore all the confusing stuff, here is the simplest way to tackle a few audits at once.
Inline your critical CSS - the only step you really need
Any CSS that is required to render the 'above the fold' content should be inlined within your HTML within a style tag.
I will warn you, this is difficult, none of the tools out there do this perfectly and it must have every single style rule included to work. (e.g. if you missed just one class that is required to render something 'above the fold' the browser will wait for the style sheet that contains that rule to be loaded and block the rendering.)
Designing for this from the start is the best option
I keep all my 'above the fold' styles in a separate file and inline them at runtime.
I split these files into 2 types - global (site header, general styles used on multiple pages above the fold etc.) and page-specific (e.g. hero for home page, form styling for contact forms etc... whatever is 'above the fold' on each page that is unique enough to not add to the global above the fold styles.)
This will deal with render blocking resources, critical request chains (for CSS) and give you super fast First Contentful Paint and First Meaningful Paint.
Then you just do as they suggest having styles for mobile and desktop separate and make sure you remove unused CSS if you can (yet again a very difficult task so best to design for it from the start).
I have a few lines of styles in every page. I'd rather not to put them in one css file for it might affect the styles of other page.
Do we really need to put the styles on a css file or is it ok to have
<style>...</style>
on every page?
What are the advantages of putting the styles in one page regarding to it's speed?
Does it speed up the loading of a page?
Basically it is a compromise option. Like Marty Wallace and Marc B stated.
The speed aspect is therefore a consequence of the option you take, as they are both valid. Just remember these two factors:
should you choose to use the CSS in the <style> section of your HTML file, it will be loaded everytime with each page load. Therefore, the more CSS rules you have in this section, the bigger the file, hence, longer loading time and slower speed.
If you <link> a stylesheet, that file will be requested everytime you load the page as well. So more or less the same relation to loading time is implied, although it may differ a lot in absolute value.
Also, you should have in mind that most browsers have caching mechanisms to optimize the usage of CSS. Try to read more about it so you can take advantage of it as well.
My opinion is that a mixed approach is probably the best option. Choose the rules that are to be applied to the common elements between your different pages and put them in a linked CSS file. Then, use the <style> tag to set specific CSS for elements on that page. This is my I-don't-care-about-it-that-much way of doing it.
Most of the time I found that CSS doesn't impact performance that much - but of course, it depends a lot on how much CSS you are actually using.
I am new in css. My project is Layout Manager. Most of the time I use inline css. When I showed my project to the project head, he said to reduce inline css.
Is inline css really bad for project? Please help to clear my vision.
Inline CSS is bad, period. It does not matter which framework you're using. In addition to bloating the document (and potentially slowing load time), it also makes it a lot harder to figure out where the heck values are being set -- as a general rule HTML is dynamic and CSS rarely is. This means if you want to change a style value, you are probably looking at one, flat CSS file, instead of a potentially massive codebase.
I am new in css
No, you are new to wweb programming. You can not say you did HTML etc. without touching CSS at all ;)
My project is Layout Manager
Which tells us nothing.
Is inline css really bad for project?
no, it has zero implications for your project.
It normally is a maintenance problem (not if auto generated). It's main issue is waste of bandwidth because inline CSS have to be on every page instead of being on a seaprate file loaded only once for all pages in the site. Dependingon size and traffic this can be SIGNIFICANT.
the reasons why should avoid inlines css
a) Separation of concerns - your markup should contain only markup code and all you rhutehr hunky dory code should be in separate files like js and css.One of the main goals of CSS is to remove the design elements from the HTML and place them in another location for the designer to maintain. That means that a designer doesn't have to also be the content developer to maintain the look of the Web site.
b) Caching of Files when you have your js and css in separate files the browsers starts caching this till something has changed on the server and this means less data transmitted between the server and the client thus saving up on b/w and the page loading faster for your viewers..
c)Make maintenance easy
One of the most forgotten elements of Web design is the maintenance. Things change - from the look of your site to the content and links within it. And having your CSS in a central place makes it that much easier to maintain.
d)Keep your site accessibile
Using CSS styles can keep your site more accessible both to disabled people and to robots like search engines.
e)Your site will stay current longer
By using best practices with your CSS, you're using standards that have been proven to work and remain flexible as the Web design environment changes.
In this case the style will be loaded before the page loads.
<html>
<head>
<link href="style.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
</head>
<body>
<div class="anyClass">Hello</div>
</body>
</html>
But if we use the following, browser will be interrupted during parsing every specific style defined inline the style attribute, so this will slowdown load-time:
<html>
<body>
<div style="height: 70px;">Hello</div>
</body>
</html>
Also, placing the style in a separate style-sheet will help you reusing the styles and maintenance of the code will be easier.
Inline CSS is bad or good depending on what you will achieve in the project in the future.
For example take this two general cases:
If the css that you define inline will be used again then using inline is bad, just add it to a css file and reuse it every time you need in the future.
If the inline you are using is an one time exception then it is a good solution and there is no point in overcomplicating design by placing it in a separate css file.
It is a good practice to separate HTML, css and javascript in separate files and because you are new to web programming, you can make this practice easily from the beginning.
The disadvantages of inline CSS are:
Significant usage of bandwidth.
Cannot use a style on multiple documents.
Cannot implement pseudo-elements and pseudo-classes in inline styles.
Cannot create neat and clean HTML with inline css.
How do you usually handle changes to screen and print CSS files? I typically have one screen CSS and one print CSS file and for the most part the I would copy the contents of screen CSS to print CSS file and then modify some properties, classes or ids, maybe set some display:none to certain classes etc.
The problem is, while working on a site or web app I make numerous changes to screen CSS and usually forget about print CSS then I have to sync them from time to time and I just don't think that the most optimal way.
For print stylesheets I tend to also apply the media="screen" stylesheet to the media="print" as well as a second stylesheet that appears later, which essentially, just removes the elements I don't want to print.
It's a fairly simplistic approach, though, and only works to any potential if it's regularly reviewed, so I couple it with a policy of always revising (or, at least, checking) it when I revise the screen-stylesheet.
When I see website starter code and examples, the CSS is always in a separate file, named something like "main.css", "default.css", or "Site.css". However, when I'm coding up a page, I'm often tempted to throw the CSS in-line with a DOM element, such as by setting "float: right" on an image. I get the feeling that this is "bad coding", since it's so rarely done in examples.
I understand that if the style will be applied to multiple objects, it's wise to follow "Don't Repeat Yourself" (DRY) and assign it to a CSS class to be referenced by each element. However, if I won't be repeating the CSS on another element, why not in-line the CSS as I write the HTML?
The question: Is using in-line CSS considered bad, even if it will only be used on that element? If so, why?
Example (is this bad?):
<img src="myimage.gif" style="float:right" />
Having to change 100 lines of code when you want to make the site look different. That may not apply in your example, but if you're using inline css for things like
<div style ="font-size:larger; text-align:center; font-weight:bold">
on each page to denote a page header, it would be a lot easier to maintain as
<div class="pageheader">
if the pageheader is defined in a single stylesheet so that if you want to change how a page header looks across the entire site, you change the css in one place.
However, I'll be a heretic and say that in your example, I see no problem. You're targeting the behavior of a single image, which probably has to look right on a single page, so putting the actual css in a stylesheet would probably be overkill.
The advantage for having a different css file are
Easy to maintain your html page
Change to the Look and feel will be easy and you can have support for many themes on your pages.
Your css file will be cached on the browser side. So you will contribute a little on internet traffic by not loading some kbs of data every time a the page is refreshed or user navigates your site.
The html5 approach to fast css prototyping
or: <style> tags are no longer just for the head any more!
Hacking CSS
Let's say you're debugging, and want to modify your page-css, make a certain section only look better. Instead of creating your styles inline the quick and dirty and un-maintainable way, you can do what I do these days and take a staged approach.
No inline style attribute
Never create your css inline, by which I mean: <element style='color:red'> or even <img style='float:right'> It's very convenient, but doesn't reflect actual selector specificity in a real css file later, and if you keep it, you'll regret the maintenance load later.
Prototype with <style> instead
Where you would have used inline css, instead use in-page <style> elements. Try that out! It works fine in all browsers, so is great for testing, yet allows you to gracefully move such css out to your global css files whenever you want/need to! ( *just be aware that the selectors will only have page-level specificity, instead of site-level specificity, so be wary of being too general) Just as clean as in your css files:
<style>
.avatar-image{
float:right
}
.faq .warning{
color:crimson;
}
p{
border-left:thin medium blue;
// this general of a selector would be very bad, though.
// so be aware of what'll happen to general selectors if they go
// global
}
</style>
Refactoring other people's inline css
Sometimes you're not even the problem, and you're dealing with someone else's inline css, and you have to refactor it. This is another great use for the <style> in page, so that you can directly strip the inline css and immediate place it right on the page in classes or ids or selectors while you're refactoring. If you are careful enough with your selectors as you go, you can then move the final result to the global css file at the end with just a copy & paste.
It's a little hard to transfer every bit of css immediately to the global css file, but with in-page <style> elements, we now have alternatives.
In addition to other answers.... Internationalization.
Depending of the language of the content - you often need to adapt the styling of an element.
One obvious example would be right-to-left languages.
Let's say you used your code:
<img src="myimage.gif" style="float:right" />
Now say you want your website to support rtl languages - you would need:
<img src="myimage.gif" style="float:left" />
So now, if you want to support both languages, there's no way to assign a value to float using inline styling.
With CSS this is easily taken care of with the lang attribute
So you could do something like this:
img {
float:right;
}
html[lang="he"] img { /* Hebrew. or.. lang="ar" for Arabic etc */
float:left;
}
Demo
Inline CSS will always, always win in precedence over any linked-stylesheet CSS. This can cause enormous headache for you if and when you go and write a proper cascading stylesheet, and your properties aren't applying correctly.
It also hurts your application semantically: CSS is about separating presentation from markup. When you tangle the two together, things get much more difficult to understand and maintain. It's a similar principle as separating database code from your controller code on the server side of things.
Finally, imagine that you have 20 of those image tags. What happens when you decide that they should be floated left?
This only applies to handwritten code. If you generate code, I think that it's okay to use inline styles here and then, especially in cases where elements and controls need special treatment.
DRY is a good concept for handwritten code, but in machine-generated code, I opt for "Law of Demeter": "What belongs together, must stay together". It's easier to manipulate code that generates Style tags than to edit a global style a second time in a different and "remote" CSS file.
The answer to your question: it depends...
Using inline CSS is much harder to maintain.
For every property you want to change, using inline CSS requires you to look for the corresponding HTML code, instead of just looking inside clearly-defined and hopefully well-structured CSS files.
The whole point of CSS is to separate content from its presentation. So in your example you are mixing content with presentation and this may be "considered harmful".
In addition to the other answers, another concern is that it violates the recommended Content Security Policy from MDN, https://infosec.mozilla.org/guidelines/web_security#content-security-policy
The justification they use is that inline javascript is harmful, XSS, etc., but it doesn't justify why inline styles should also be disabled. Maybe someone can comment as to why, but until then, I'll just rely on appeal-to-authority and claim: it's a security best practice to avoid inline styles.
Code how you like to code, but if you are passing it on to someone else it is best to use what everyone else does. There are reasons for CSS, then there are reasons for inline. I use both, because it is just easier for me. Using CSS is wonderful when you have a lot of the same repetition. However, when you have a bunch of different elements with different properties then that becomes a problem. One instance for me is when I am positioning elements on a page. Each element as a different top and left property. If I put that all in a CSS that would really annoy the mess out of me going between the html and css page. So CSS is great when you want everything to have the same font, color, hover effect, etc. But when everything has a different position adding a CSS instance for each element can really be a pain. That is just my opinion though. CSS really has great relevance in larger applications when your having to dig through code. Use Mozilla web developer plugin and it will help you find the elements IDs and Classes.
I think that even if you want to have a certain style for one element, you have to consider the possibility that you may want to apply the same style on the same element on different pages.
One day somebody may ask to change or add more stylistic changes to the same element on every page. If you had the styles defined in an external CSS file, you would only have to make changes there, and it would be reflected in the same element in all of the pages, thus saving you a headache. :-)
Even if you only use the style once as in this example you've still mixed CONTENT and DESIGN. Lookup "Separation of concerns".
Using inline styles violates the Separation of Concerns principle, as you are effectively mixing markup and style in the same source file. It also, in most cases, violates the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle since they are only applicable to a single element, whereas a class can be applied to several of them (and even be extended through the magic of CSS rules!).
Furthermore, judicious use of classes is beneficial if your site contains scripting. For example, several popular JavaScript libs such as JQuery depend heavily on classes as selectors.
Finally, using classes adds additional clarity to your DOM, since you effectively have descriptors telling you what kind of element a given node in it is. For example:
<div class="header-row">It's a row!</div>
Is a lot more expressive than:
<div style="height: 80px; width: 100%;">It's...something?</div>
Inline CSS is good for machine-generated code, and can be fine when most visitors only browse one page on a site, but one thing it can't do is handle media queries to allow different looks for screens of different sizes. For that, you need to include the CSS either in an external style sheet or in an internal style tag.
In-page css is the in-thing at the moment because Google rates it as giving a better user experience than css loaded from a separate file. A possible solution is to put the css in a text file, load it on the fly with php, and output it into the document head. In the <head> section include this:
<head> ...
<?php
$codestring = file_get_contents("styles/style1.txt");
echo "<style>" . $codestring . "</style>";
?>
... </head>
Put the required css in styles/style1.txt and it'll get spat out in the <head> section of your document. This way, you'll have in-page css with the benefit of using a style template, style1.txt, which can be shared by any and all pages, allowing site-wide style changes to be made via only that one file. Furthermore, this method doesn't require the browser to request separate css files from the server (thus minimising retrieval / rendering time), since everything is delivered at once by php.
Having implemented this, individual one-time-only styles can be manually coded where needed.
According to the AMP HTML Specification it is necessary to put CSS in your HTML file (vs an external stylesheet) for performance purposes. This does not mean inline CSS but they do specify no external stylesheets.
An incomplete list of optimizations such a serving system might do is:
Replace image references with images sized to the viewer’s viewport.
Inline images that are visible above the fold.
Inline CSS variables.
Preload extended components.
Minify HTML and CSS.
Personally, I think the hatred of inline css is just ridiculous. Hardcore cult behaviour, people just sheepishly repeat "Separation of concerns!". Yes, there are times where if there is a repeating element and you will need repeated styling to use a class targeted from a CSS file, but most of the time it improves speed of development and CLARITY OF CODE to put the style inline, it's great if I can look at the code and see that there is a custom margin height, it helps me picture the HTML document as a whole, instead of some named class that gives me little insight into which styles will be applied.
So I will be the contrarian here and say that inline css is great and that people who scream at you for using it are just following what they have been told without actually giving it any original unbiased consideration.
Even though I totally agree with all the answers given above that writing CSS in a separate file is always better from code reusability, maintainability, better separation of concerns there are many scenarios where people prefer inline CSS in their production code -
The external CSS file causes one extra HTTP call to browser and thus additional latency. Instead if the CSS is inserted inline then browser can start parsing it right away. Especially over SSL HTTP calls are more costly and adds up additional latency to the page. There are many tools available that helps to generate static HTML pages (or page snippet) by inserting external CSS files as inline code. These tools are used at the Build and Release phase where the production binary is generated. This way we get all the advantages of external CSS and also the page becomes faster.
In addition to other answers, you cant target the pseudo-classes or pseudo-elements in inline CSS
We have created a template-driven artifact generator that provides an include file capability for any kind of text artifact -- HTML, XML, computer languages, unstructured text, DSV, etc. (E.g., it's great for handling common Web or manual page headers and footers without scripting.)
Once you have that and use it to provide "style" tags inside your "head" tag, the "separation of concerns" argument goes away, to be replaced by "we have to regenerate after every change to the template" and "we have to debug the template from what it generates". Those gripes have been around since the first computer language to get a preprocessor (or someone started using M4).
On balance, we think the meta-izing capability of either a CSS file or "style" tags is cleaner and less error-prone than element-level styling. But it does require some professional judgment, so newbies and scatterbrains don't bother.