4 ms·
Static websites take away one of the crucial pieces of blogging: Comments.
by anc84 10y ago
Static websites take away one of the crucial pieces of blogging: Comments.
- liw 10y agohttp://ikiwiki.info/ http://ikiwiki.info/ supports comments. There are several variants of "static website": * Site is generated by its author, and won't change until author changes and re-generates it. * Site generates content when something changes (e.g., new comment), not on each page view. (Cf. ikiwiki in cgi mode.)
- ssalazar 10y agoIts trivial in Jekyll to add support for a 3rd party comment service, e.g. Disqus.
- e12e 10y agoOnly if you are comfortable using a 3rd party comment service (or injecting 3rd party javascript in your site in the first place). I know it's common, but even with the advances in CORS and whatnot, it still (IMNHO) defeats a lot of the benefits of a static web site. That said, I would probably prefer embedding disqus or https://muut.com/ https://muut.com/ comments to running a complex php application just for comments.
- astrobe_ 10y agoIs it? The crucial flaw of public comments is that they can be used to address other people than the author; hence spam and trolls for instance. And what's the ratio of actually useful comments anyway? Does it justify the cost of dealing with all the rest (like, say, your blog going down because some comment DB broke which directly hurts your actual readership)? One-way communication has its advantages, too. Those who really have something to tell you can always use email.
- cbr 10y agoIf you make the page static, and have it AJAX back to load the comments, then you get the best of both worlds. (This is what I wrote for my blog.)