Cloud Four Blog

Technical notes, War stories and anecdotes

Shifty Tile Flyouts

Although my favorite projects will always be those that allow us to re-evaluate a user experience from the ground up, sometimes that isn’t realistic. That’s where Responsive Retrofitting comes in: The process of making small, surgical changes to existing interfaces to improve the small-screen experience incrementally.

Each and every retrofit is a little different, but patterns do emerge. In the past couple of years, I’ve noticed one particularly challenging bit of UI that’s cropped up multiple times for multiple clients.

Illustration of tile-based interface with flyout

Here’s how it works: We have tiles separated into rows and columns. Each tile represents some form of summary content; contact info or payment options, for example. Selecting a tile (or clicking an “edit” button therein) expands a flyout below with some sort of form content, which spans the entire available width and “pushes” down any tiles below.

Every time I’ve encountered this, it’s been implemented in the same way. Because the design is fixed-width, the number of columns in each row is predictable. Flyout elements are simply inserted between rows:

<div class="Tiles">
  <div class="Tile">
    <div class="Tile-content">
      Tile 1
  <div class="Tile">
    <div class="Tile-content">
      Tile 2
  <div class="Tile">
    <div class="Tile-content">
      Tile 3
  <div class="Tile">
    <div class="Tile-content">
      Tile 4
  <div class="Flyout is-open js-flyout">
    <div class="Flyout-content">
      Flyout 1
  <div class="Flyout Flyout--2of4 js-flyout">
    <div class="Flyout-content">
      Flyout 2
  <div class="Flyout Flyout--3of4 js-flyout">
    <div class="Flyout-content">
      Flyout 3
  <div class="Flyout Flyout--4of4 js-flyout">
    <div class="Flyout-content">
      Flyout 4
  <div class="Tile">
    <div class="Tile-content">
      Tile 5
  <div class="Tile">
    <div class="Tile-content">
      Tile 6
  <div class="Flyout js-flyout">
    <div class="Flyout-content">
      Flyout 5
  <div class="Flyout Flyout--2of4 js-flyout">
    <div class="Flyout-content">
      Flyout 6

See the Pen Shifty Tiles: Part 1 by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

The content order’s pretty messed up, but it works as intended. Or it would have, if it hadn’t been for that meddling Ethan Marcotte and those media queries of his. When you throw responsive into the mix, that predictable column count we depended on goes right out the window:

Animation of responsive tiles with flyout

We could listen to resize events and move the flyouts around with JavaScript. But you and I both know that’s a bad idea. Let’s see how we can solve this problem with CSS alone, maybe even improving the content order along the way.

To Float or Not To Float

If we revise our markup so that the tiles and flyouts are unified (instead of separated by arbitrary “rows”), we’ll discover that the floats we were using to arrange tiles side-by-side do not handle change well. Depending on which tile flyout is expanded, subsequent tiles attempt to float around it, resulting in an inconsistent (and frankly, upsetting) experience for wider viewports:

See the Pen Shifty Tiles: Part 2 by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Well that’s it, then! Floats don’t work, we need tiles to float, time to throw in the towel and handle this with JavaScript.

Not so fast!

Instead of floating the tiles, we can steal borrow a technique from the SUIT CSS grid component and use display: inline-block instead. Combined with vertical-align: top, the tallest tile in a row should push down everything beneath it (just like a tall image in a line of text would affect adjacent rows).

Let’s give it a whirl:

See the Pen Shifty Tiles: Part 3 by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Success! Even as flyouts shove their way between rows, the tiles retain their horizontal position.

But those flyouts are still awfully narrow at larger sizes. Let’s fix that.

Manifest Destiny

Our goal is for the flyouts to occupy 100% of the available width across all viewports. So far, they’re only ever as wide as the tiles themselves. If we’re decreasing tile widths at larger breakpoints, we should also increase flyout widths by the same factor.

If you’re using a preprocessor like Sass and you hate solving the same math problems over and over as much as I do, now’s a great time to write a mixin to handle this logic across multiple breakpoints:

@mixin generate-tile-grid($columns) {
  .Tile {
    // divide the available width by the number of columns
    width: (100% / $columns);
  .Tile-flyout {
    // extend beyond the tile width by the same factor
    width: (100% * $columns);
  .Tile-flyout:before {
    // adjust the position of the flyout caret
    left: (100% / 2 / $columns);
@media (min-width: 30em) {
  @include generate-tile-grid(2);
/* etc. */

Here’s where that gets us:

See the Pen Shifty Tiles: Part 4 by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

So close! The widths are correct, but we haven’t accounted for the tile’s changing horizontal position. Let’s revise that mixin we wrote, using :nth-child selectors to offset the flyouts per column:

@mixin generate-tile-grid($columns) {
  .Tile {
    width: (100% / $columns);
  .Tile-flyout {
    width: (100% * $columns);
  // for every column in this grid
  @for $column from 1 through $columns {
    .Tile:nth-child(#{$columns}n+#{$column}) {
      .Tile-flyout {
        // offset the left margin by the number of preceding columns
        margin-left: (-100% * ($column - 1));
      .Tile-flyout:before {
        // adjust the caret position similarly
        left: (100% / $columns * ($column - 0.5));

Drumroll, please…

See the Pen Shifty Tiles: Part 5 by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

…and boom goes the dynamite.

In Practice

Because this technique is initially counter-intuitive (at least to me), I kept the examples pretty simple. If you’re still a little fuzzy on how this interface pattern might work in practice, here’s a more complex demo involving hypothetical payment methods and their associated edit forms. Tap or click a tile to toggle:

See the Pen Responsive tiles with column-spanning flyouts by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Having retrofitted this type of UI multiple times now, I’d be remiss if I didn’t voice some concerns I have about its usability. Because the vertical position of subsequent tiles changes as flyouts expand and collapse, it can be frustrating to use on smaller screens without a nightmarish amount of fragile and jank-inducing scroll management. If redesigning is an option for this pattern, I recommend reading Luke W’s post about dropdowns for some much more straightforward alternatives.

Or better yet, drop us a line. Solving these problems is kind of our thing.

Introducing Leveller: Please Avoid Using It

This happens to me over and over: I have a multi-column grid of tiles, each with varying heights. This means the bottom of certain rows can appear jagged and difficult to scan visually:

See the Pen Leveller: Before by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Ideally, I’d use flexbox to solve that problem with a shockingly small amount of CSS (especially if you use Autoprefixer). Seriously, look how well that works:

See the Pen Leveller: Flexbox Alternative by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Sadly, that solution rarely makes it into production on the projects I’ve worked on. Sometimes browser support is the culprit. Other times we’ve inherited particularly uncooperative grid patterns (either from an existing project, or an overzealous framework).

Over the last few years, I wrote and re-wrote project-specific, bespoke JavaScript to solve this problem. I’ve finally accepted that it isn’t going away, at least not as quickly as I’d like it to.

So I’ve written a jQuery plugin for equalizing element heights. It’s called Leveller:

See the Pen Leveller: After by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Don’t use Leveller if you can help it. Flexbox is way more appropriate. If you only need to adjust min-height properties, Equalizer is a leaner, dependency-free solution.

But if all else fails, Leveller is available now on GitHub (and also via npm). Godspeed!

Two pretty-good techniques for styling tricky form elements

Confession time: For most of my career, I despised form elements. Checkboxes, radios, selects and file inputs seemed to gleefully defy what little control I expected from an HTML element. Their penchant for idiosyncracy drove me to almost as much hair-pulling and teeth-gnashing as IE6 or web-safe fonts.

These days, my frustration with form elements has quieted. Partly that’s because browsers and development tools are so much better. But more significantly, I now understand the benefits of surrendering some control to the operating system. As devices continue to accept a greater and greater variety of input methods (keyboard, mouse, touch, voice, gesture, remote, etc.) while browsers adopt an astounding variety of new input types , it’s a gift for vendors to provide default experiences consistent with the user’s expectations of the platform.

So I no longer strive for “pixel perfection” when styling form elements. I don’t need absolute control. All I want is something easy to tap that feels intentional.

When the browser defaults don’t get me there, here are my go-to workarounds.

Checkboxes and Radios: Styled Sibling

This technique works in any browser that supports CSS3 selectors (basically IE9+). If you read Radio-Controlled Web Design a few weeks ago, this should feel familiar. Let’s start with a checkbox example.

We’ll need a few HTML elements:

  • The <input> itself.
  • A dummy element to style (right next to the <input>).
  • A containing <label> that passes click events to the aforementioned <input>.

I like to wrap the <input> and dummy elements in a container to keep everything nice and tidy, but strictly speaking it isn’t required. Here’s what that markup might look like:

  <span class="checkbox">
    <input type="checkbox">
    <span class="checkbox-value" aria-hidden="true"></span>
  Set phasers to stun

We’re now free to visually hide the checkbox, styling .checkbox-value however we like:

/* hide the "real" checkbox visually */
.checkbox input {
  border: 0;
  clip: rect(0 0 0 0);
  height: 1px;
  margin: -1px;
  overflow: hidden;
  padding: 0;
  position: absolute;
  width: 1px;
/* style the "fake" checkbox */
.checkbox-value {
  /* default/unchecked styles */
input:checked + .checkbox-value {
  /* checked styles */

When the user clicks the label, the click is passed along to the <input>, which toggles the state of :checked, which affects the appearance of .checkbox-value.

Here’s an example that styles the checkbox like an iOS-style switch:

See the Pen Styled checkbox by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

Here’s the same idea applied to radio buttons with a slightly more conventional design (incorporating a base64-encoded SVG checkmark):

See the Pen Styled radios by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

This technique has a few drawbacks. It requires some extra markup. It won’t work in IE8 or earlier without a fallback. It could probably use another pass for accessibility. But compared to most of the JavaScript solutions I’ve tried, this feels straightforward, consistent and predictable.

Selects and File Inputs: Transparent Overlay + JavaScript

For more complex elements like <select> and <input type="file">, we can’t get by on CSS alone (though it gets us further than one might expect).

Our markup is similar to the previous set of checkbox/radio examples, except we won’t need a <label> for click events:

<div class="select">
    <option>Option 1</option>
    <option>Option 2</option>
    <option>Option 3</option>
  <span class="select-value" aria-hidden="true"></span>

Instead of hiding the <select> entirely, we want to position it over the rest of our element, allowing it to intercept click events and correctly position any dropdown it may display. Because this technique relies on JavaScript, we’ll qualify some of our selectors with .js (since you’re probably already using Modernizr).

.js .select {
  position: relative;
  /* default styles */
.js .select:hover {
  /* hover styles */
.js .select.focus {
  /* focus styles */
/* nicer default styles for "real" <select> */
.select select {
  cursor: pointer;
  display: block;
  width: 100%;
/* hide and overlay when JavaScript is enabled */
.js .select select {
  left: 0;
  height: 100%;
  min-height: 100%;
  min-width: 100%;
  opacity: 0;
  position: absolute;
  top: 0;

Already, this “works.” Options will display on click. But there are some problems. The value doesn’t update. There are no hover or focus styles. That’s where JavaScript comes in!

(Although I’ve chosen to write this in jQuery for the sake of readability, remember: You Might Not Need jQuery!)

// For each .select element
  // Save some elements as variables
  var $element = $(this);
  var $select = $element.find('select');
  var $value = $element.find('.select-value');
  // Bind event handlers to <select>
    // On change or keyup, update the value text
    'change keyup': function () {
    // On focus, add the focus class
    'focus': function () {
    // On blur, remove the focus class
    'blur': function () {
  // Trigger the change event so the value
  // is current

Here’s how all of that comes together:

See the Pen Styled select by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

With some tweaks, the same basic technique can also work for file inputs (assuming experimental WebKit/Blink features aren’t your thing):

See the Pen Styled file input by Tyler Sticka (@tylersticka) on CodePen.

This idea isn’t new. Peter-Paul Koch wrote about it quite a while back. Yet I rarely see it in use outside of a few large mobile frameworks. I’m honestly not sure why.

…and beyond?

What do all of these examples have in common? They don’t mess with the form element too much! By worrying less about customizing behavior and more on simply triggering it, we can indulge some of our designerly impulses without discarding all a given platform has to offer.

Consistency and functionality… no hair-pulling or teeth-gnashing required!

Update: September 8, 2014

A reader pointed out that the select example wasn’t responding to keyboard input in Firefox. I discovered that Firefox doesn’t fire the change event for selects like other browsers do, so I’ve updated the demo and example code so that it binds to both change and keyup.

I also learned that Firefox doesn’t show the full dropdown on any keypress, but this seems to be true of unstyled <select> elements as well. I encourage developers to use these examples as a starting point, and to augment usability shortcomings on a case-by-case basis if the default browser behavior isn’t cutting it.

Fixed and inflexible

Even before smartphones came along and dashed any hope for a 960-pixel-wide web, designers and organizations have struggled with the challenge of prioritizing and composing content that scrolls. Our screens act like windows to content of variable size and scale, demanding an awful lot of abstract thinking to design for. Sometimes we’re successful, revising content, designing modern day deliverables and embracing compromise like we know in our hearts we should. Other times, we convince ourselves that we can predict this inherently unpredictable medium, making decisions that age quickly and poorly by prioritizing the window instead of the content.

Most recently, I’ve noticed a sharp uptick in the number of requests I receive to explore fixed-position (aka “sticky”) interface elements. Fixed elements are positioned relative to the viewport instead of the page, allowing them to maintain position even as the document scrolls. Some of the most popular sites on the web employ “sticky” menus, and with good reason… when applied thoughtfully, they can yield substantial usability improvements.

But when fixed positioning is used without care, restraint or precision, it can have disastrous consequences. Here are some of the reasons why.

We can’t predict how much space we have.

Our industry has a nasty habit of quietly embracing display resolution “standards” that are mostly fantasy… design decisions are a lot easier if you assume all devices are 320 pixels wide by 480 pixels tall (and users never turn them sideways). The inconvenient truth is that display resolutions vary wildly. Each additional “sticky” element increases the risk of obscuring the page content mostly (or entirely) for some users… in which case the page might as well not exist at all.

We can’t get those pixels back.

Fixed elements aren’t just “prominent,” they photobomb the interface, robbing focus and attention from what really matters — the content! Before you make something “sticky,” consider reevaluating the element’s importance relative to the entire page (instead of on its own merits).

It makes scrolling tougher.

As evidenced by the years-long debate over “The Fold,” the fear that users won’t know (or lack willingness) to scroll persists to this day. When that fear is real, then fixed positioning is a godsend, ensuring the visibility of content regardless of scroll position.

But those fears don’t mesh with reality very well.

Today’s users are so familiar with scrolling that most mobile browsers will hide the scrollbar entirely. “Sticky” elements complicate matters by reducing or obscuring the scrollable area, forcing the user to swipe more carefully to avoid accidental actions.

Ironically, our desire to alleviate the supposed “difficulty” of scrolling may make scrolling that much more difficult!

It can slow everything down.

Users care about speed. But speed isn’t all about navigation… there’s also the overall speed of the experience. Fixed positioning can result in strange browser-specific quirks or even costly repaints, potentially counteracting any efficiency you might have gained.

It may not actually work.

Mobile websites share a lot of their design vocabulary with native mobile apps, where fixed headers, menus and tab bars are commonplace. This makes it easy to forget that fixed positioning as we know it is relatively new to the web, and often unreliable.

“Sticky” headers, footers and navigation flourished in the 1990s, often implemented using frames. When frames fell out of fashion in the early 2000s, most browsers did not support fixed positioning using CSS. In the absence of frames, position: fixed or consistent, intuitive JavaScript, fixed positioning became just another discarded Web 1.0 trend… at least until CSS support arrived in IE7.

But smartphone browsers have historically not supported position: fixed as predictably as their desktop counterparts. It was entirely absent from mobile Safari prior to iOS5, and largely unusable in Android browsers prior to Honeycomb. To this day, behavior can be inconsistent across platforms. To quote Brad Frost in his excellent post on Fixed Positioning in Mobile Browsers, “‘support’ isn’t exactly binary.”

Since you can’t rely on support for fixed positioning, you’ll need to make sure your experience works without it anyway. Which begs the question…

Why position: fixed at all?

I believe there are plenty of interface elements that benefit from fixed positioning, provided they follow a few best practices:

  • The “sticky” element is clearly more important than everything else on the page.
  • The footprint of the element is modest enough that it does not obscure too much of the page content (even in landscape).
  • Any efficiency gained from the element’s consistent availability is significantly greater than any lost as a result of the element’s inclusion (due to performance, obscuring of page content, etc.).
  • There should only be one “global” (navigation, tab bar, etc.) and one “temporary” (modal, dialog, etc.) fixed-position element on-screen at any one time.
  • Fixed positioning should always be an enhancement. Your interfaces should never rely on it.

If any of these considerations completely upend your design aspirations, you may want to rethink your user experience with less rigidity. As John Allsopp so aptly put it fourteen years ago, “The journey begins by letting go of control, and becoming flexible.”

What’s New in hideShowPassword 2

Last June, we released our hideShowPassword plugin for improving the experience of password-entry (particularly on mobile devices). As of this writing, it’s our most-starred and most-forked project on GitHub.

We’ve released a handful of incremental and bug-fix updates since then, but today we’re shipping a full-fledged Version 2 with several noteworthy improvements.

Simpler Usage

The plugin’s “inner toggle” feature tended to steal the show, yet its syntax was verbose:

$(selector).hideShowPassword(true, { innerToggle: true });

We now support a simpler, shorthand syntax for enabling the inner toggle:

$(selector).hideShowPassword(true, true);
// enable toggle but hide till input focus:
$(selector).hideShowPassword(true, 'focus');
// using shorthand method:

Improved Accessibility

My personal favorite feature is the improved accessibility of the inner toggle button. Some changes we made based on real-world feedback:

  • The toggle button element is now a <button> by default (it was previously a <div>).

  • Several accessibility attributes have been added to better communicate the purpose and state of the button to assistive devices.

  • The toggle should now be keyboard-accessible, with space and enter key events attached where necessary.

We understand every project’s different, and you may need to tweak some of these new properties. Luckily, Version 2 also includes…

Overhauled Options

Just about anything we could make an option, we have. There are so many new options, we had to re-organize the options object to accommodate them all. See the full list here.

Built For jQuery and Zepto

Version 1 of hideShowPassword supported Zepto, but we’ve decided to simplify the plugin’s dependencies by only supporting jQuery from here on out. This makes sense to us for a few reasons:

  • Zepto’s data module was required, necessitating a custom build of Zepto to work at all.

  • The plugin’s inner toggle features could be unpredictable given Zepto’s simpler width and height calculation methods.

  • Zepto does not support AMD, and likely never will. We introduced AMD support to hideShowPassword in our first minor update based on developer feedback.

  • While Zepto’s modest file size remains an attractive feature, its performance once loaded may not be so competitive.

Get It Now!

All the aforementioned improvements (plus more fixes and tweaks) are available right now on GitHub (which is also a great place to report issues or request features). Check out the live demo if you remain unconvinced.

If you use the plugin in a project, please drop us a line and let us know. We’d love to hear about it!