4 ms·
There is some useful stuff to learn from here, undeniably, but many of these are a bit useless when you compare them with what you would actually typically need
by bshimmin 10y ago
There is some useful stuff to learn from here, undeniably, but many of these are a bit useless when you compare them with what you would actually typically need on a real site. Yes, the "image slider" is vaguely functional, but really most of the time you will want a lot more control than just the CSS animations allow; similarly, yes, the form validation is a starting point, but normally you would want to customise the error messages and generally fiddle around with it a lot more; I'm not really sure the modal is fit for purpose beyond the most basic use case... etc.
It's fun to see what you can partially achieve without JavaScript, but there is no shame in using JavaScript sensibly to enhance the usefulness of a web site.
- Retr0spectrum 10y agoImage sliders are considered bad UX to begin with, and the lack of user control makes them even worse IMHO.
- klibertp 10y agoWhat bothers me is that I saw many of these things implemented in CSS only in ~2004. Of course, it required much more code then, including shims for IE 6 and careful slicing of GIFs, but things like tabs, accordion or lightbox were being implemented. Makes me wonder where the last decade went. At least there was a good reason to avoid JS back then: it was slow and often looked worse than CSS hacks.