4 ms·

For government websites I can understand it but for commercial stuff I think this attitude of "everyone must be supported at all cost" is nonsensical. Where do

by borplk 10y ago

For government websites I can understand it but for commercial stuff I think this attitude of "everyone must be supported at all cost" is nonsensical. Where do you draw the line? Do I have to also support people who prefer to use command line text-based web browsers? Before you know it we'll have someone say "Oh I work for a bank, we have HTML disabled here. Can you make it work without HTML?" give me a break.

zeveb 10y ago
> Do I have to also support people who prefer to use command line text-based web browsers? Yes. The web is about linked HTML documents: if you don't support lynx, links, elinks, w3m, emacs-w3m & eww then you're honestly not doing Web development properly. You have to do more work to not support them, because writing plain HTML + forms is the baseline. > Before you know it we'll have someone say "Oh I work for a bank, we have HTML disabled here. Can you make it work without HTML?" give me a break. That wouldn't be using the Web anymore.
- matthewowen 10y ago
  Many people aren't building websites. They're building applications which target the cross-platform runtime and APIs provided by modern web browsers.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Many of those people should not be building applications. Boilerplate startup landing pages, blogging platforms and e-commerce sites should be websites, as they always were. As for those who really are building web applications - well, those are separate beasts. Nobody expects to run Google Docs or Gliffy properly in lynx. But I do expect my banking site to run in a text browser, because there's no valid reason it shouldn't. (Yes, I understand the business reasons for the current sad state of the web. I also believe those reasons are things one should be ashamed of.)
aarongustafson 10y ago
There is a line: support vs. optimization. Support everyone with a browser & internet access, optimize for the stuff that has the greatest market share or where you can do the most good and stand a good chance of having your dependencies met.

by borplk 10y ago

zeveb 10y ago

> Do I have to also support people who prefer to use command line text-based web browsers? Yes. The web is about linked HTML documents: if you don't support lynx, links, elinks, w3m, emacs-w3m & eww then you're honestly not doing Web development properly. You have to do more work to not support them, because writing plain HTML + forms is the baseline. > Before you know it we'll have someone say "Oh I work for a bank, we have HTML disabled here. Can you make it work without HTML?" give me a break. That wouldn't be using the Web anymore.

matthewowen 10y ago
Many people aren't building websites. They're building applications which target the cross-platform runtime and APIs provided by modern web browsers.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  Many of those people should not be building applications. Boilerplate startup landing pages, blogging platforms and e-commerce sites should be websites, as they always were. As for those who really are building web applications - well, those are separate beasts. Nobody expects to run Google Docs or Gliffy properly in lynx. But I do expect my banking site to run in a text browser, because there's no valid reason it shouldn't. (Yes, I understand the business reasons for the current sad state of the web. I also believe those reasons are things one should be ashamed of.)

aarongustafson 10y ago

There is a line: support vs. optimization. Support everyone with a browser & internet access, optimize for the stuff that has the greatest market share or where you can do the most good and stand a good chance of having your dependencies met.