2024-03-07
3578
#css
Oscar Jite-Orimiono
96807
Mar 7, 2024 ⋅ 12 min read

5 cool CSS header styles with cross-browser compatibility

Oscar Jite-Orimiono I'm a self-taught frontend web developer. I build websites so everyone finds a home online. The digital space is massive, full of endless possibilities — let's explore it together!

Recent posts:

Fix over-caching with dynamic IO caching in Next.js 15

Next.js 15 caching overhaul: Fix overcaching with Dynamic IO and the use cache directive.

David Omotayo
Aug 6, 2025 ⋅ 10 min read
LLMs are facing a QA crisis here’s how we could solve it

LLMs are facing a QA crisis: Here’s how we could solve it

LLM QA isn’t just a tooling gap — it’s a fundamental shift in how we think about software reliability.

Rosario De Chiara
Aug 4, 2025 ⋅ 7 min read

Windsurf vs. Cursor: When to choose the challenger

Windsurf AI brings agentic coding and terminal control right into your IDE. We compare it to Cursor, explore its features, and build a real frontend project.

Chizaram Ken
Jul 31, 2025 ⋅ 9 min read

The CSS if() function: Conditional styling will never be the same

The CSS Working Group has approved the if() function for development, a feature that promises to bring true conditional styling directly to our stylesheets.

Ikeh Akinyemi
Jul 30, 2025 ⋅ 12 min read
View all posts

4 Replies to "5 cool CSS header styles with cross-browser compatibility"

  1. I work in a simple product industry, and like everyone else, have a website, so we see how every marketer in my field is inspired by IT projects. We are learning CSS, although we remember well that it was quite difficult at the beginning of our journey. LogRocket is a great approach to improving productivity, and we’re trying to embed your ways of creating value for customers. For example, we use software to control the application with a remote approval feature. So, hopefully, we will keep up with CSS.

  2. I guess this is good stuff above.
    Only the first impression of this site in Google results was not so good. Maybe it happened just accidently, but it gives the immedeate impression of contents not being checked carefully:
    500ms are 0.5 seconds, not 0.050 as we read right now on the page top.

Leave a Reply