6 ms·

I don’t know who the author of this proposal is, but I believe this should not be pursued and that his idea is uninformed. Content blockers try their best do b

by yuchi 8y ago

I don’t know who the author of this proposal is, but I believe this should not be pursued and that his idea is uninformed. Content blockers try their best do block and remove specific parts of the web page, surgically identifying them. You can’t just randomly block stuff and therefore break an insane amount of websites and call it a day. What about web apps? Should there be a «this application wants to exceed the xMB quota» confirmation messages? Oh please no.

irq11 8y ago
You should be making your pages work without javascript. Progressive enhancement has been a best-practice for years. I routinely use the fast JS switcher extension to turn off javascript on any site that does any number of irritating things (popups, autoplay videos, etc.) If those sites don’t work any more, then I just never visit them again. Their loss.
- humblebee 8y ago
  > What about web apps? I think it's important to make this distinction. A lot of websites don't need the JavaScript they ship with to present the material the users want. I agree those websites should work without JavaScript. However, you can't expect actual web applications to do this. Examples - https://www.draw.io/ https://www.draw.io/ - https://www.audiotool.com/app/ https://www.audiotool.com/app/ (sign in required; demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvIu_R8bmdA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvIu_R8bmdA) - https://human.biodigital.com/signin.html https://human.biodigital.com/signin.html (sign in required; demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW4JSMlBhWQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW4JSMlBhWQ) - https://pixlr.com/x/ https://pixlr.com/x/ Other more commonly know examples - Most of Google Drive offerings - Google Analytics control panel - Twitch I see this confusion a lot when this topic is discussed on HackerNews.
  - irq11 8y ago
    Webapps can be implemented just fine without Javascript; I’ve been doing it for years. React is a luxury, not a requirement, and progressive enhancement is a thing in all but the most demanding apps. The point is, I currently exist in a world where I randomly shut off all javascript on websites, and it’s a happy world. Personally, I’d be tickled pink if it was a built-in browser feature (and if it forced web devs to be more responsible? Bonus!)
    - davidjgraph 8y ago
      Curious how to implement https://github.com/jgraph/drawio https://github.com/jgraph/drawio without JS?
    - plorntus 8y ago
      No, not in every case can they be built without JavaScript. That's an insane statement to make. Example: Build a usable decent image editor that allows you to preview your changes without the page refreshing or redownload an entirely new image (therefore using even more data). Example 2: Make a playable 3D game Example 3: Make a spreadsheet web app The list goes on. Some things can of course be done without JavaScript but tons of ideas would not only be infeasible to develop, they'd be a usability nightmare.
      - ForHackernews 8y ago
        Why do you want any of those things to run inside a browser? Those all sound like great candidates for being actual installed software. Do we even remember how to write that? This everything-is-a-website mentality is a disaster for privacy, security, and the future of decentralized general-purpose computing.
        coding123 8y ago
        Both Java and C# tried to break the web (silverlight and Java FX) and both ended up being considerable failures. We still don't have a reasonably easy way to write cross-platform applications (Mac/Win/Lin/Phone) in a native-first language. The reason JS has taken off is because it filled a rather HUGE hole. If there is a chance that is changing, let us know, but right now, the hole isn't being filled with anything else.
        perrylaj 8y ago
        JavaFX is a GUI toolkit. It does allow the use of CSS for design, but is nothing like silver light, flash, etc. It's not mean to run in a browser at all. You probably meant Java applets?
- fooey 8y ago
  Speaking as a web developer myself, I 100% abandoned supporting users without javascript a decade ago The number of people with JS turned off are so small they don't matter, and on top of that, they're not monetizable, so I really don't care if the site works for them. There is virtually never any business rationale for making that extra effort.
  - irq11 8y ago
    All the more reason to put the button in the browser. Give people the option to easily turn off the crap, and you’ll find out how much it matters.
chipotle_coyote 8y ago
The author's name is on the proposal, Craig Hockenberry. To avoid making folks Google for him, he's been running the Iconfactory, a design and programming consultancy that does, yes, icons, as well as web sites and applications. They're most famous for Twitterrific, the very first Twitter client (and the one that gave us the word "tweet" for Twitter posts as well as the blue bird icon). They've been in business over twenty years. Hockenberry is himself both an app developer and a long-time web developer. I'm not sure I particularly agree with this proposal, either, for a lot of reasons outlined in comments here (most broadly that this is putting too much of a burden on users, and that it's just likely to create a new round of cat-and-mouse games with bad actors to find ways around it), but the author certainly isn't inexperienced in web and application matters.
- ghiculescu 8y ago
  Also worth noting that he just launched a competing ad network: https://blog.iconfactory.com/2019/01/advertising-with-ollie/ https://blog.iconfactory.com/2019/01/advertising-with-ollie/
  - chipotle_coyote 8y ago
    As near as I can tell the Twitterrific ad network literally only serves in-app ads to users of Twitterrific.
- yuchi 8y ago
  Exactly what I feared. It looked suspiciously too well written to be from someone not versed on the topic. I stand on my opinion: this proposal is antithetical to the web itself. (Doesn’t change the fact that I’ve always admired all their work, now that I know who is he)

by yuchi 8y ago

irq11 8y ago

You should be making your pages work without javascript. Progressive enhancement has been a best-practice for years. I routinely use the fast JS switcher extension to turn off javascript on any site that does any number of irritating things (popups, autoplay videos, etc.) If those sites don’t work any more, then I just never visit them again. Their loss.

humblebee 8y ago
> What about web apps? I think it's important to make this distinction. A lot of websites don't need the JavaScript they ship with to present the material the users want. I agree those websites should work without JavaScript. However, you can't expect actual web applications to do this. Examples - https://www.draw.io/ https://www.draw.io/ - https://www.audiotool.com/app/ https://www.audiotool.com/app/ (sign in required; demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvIu_R8bmdA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvIu_R8bmdA) - https://human.biodigital.com/signin.html https://human.biodigital.com/signin.html (sign in required; demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW4JSMlBhWQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW4JSMlBhWQ) - https://pixlr.com/x/ https://pixlr.com/x/ Other more commonly know examples - Most of Google Drive offerings - Google Analytics control panel - Twitch I see this confusion a lot when this topic is discussed on HackerNews.
- irq11 8y ago
  Webapps can be implemented just fine without Javascript; I’ve been doing it for years. React is a luxury, not a requirement, and progressive enhancement is a thing in all but the most demanding apps. The point is, I currently exist in a world where I randomly shut off all javascript on websites, and it’s a happy world. Personally, I’d be tickled pink if it was a built-in browser feature (and if it forced web devs to be more responsible? Bonus!)
  - davidjgraph 8y ago
    Curious how to implement https://github.com/jgraph/drawio https://github.com/jgraph/drawio without JS?
  - plorntus 8y ago
    No, not in every case can they be built without JavaScript. That's an insane statement to make. Example: Build a usable decent image editor that allows you to preview your changes without the page refreshing or redownload an entirely new image (therefore using even more data). Example 2: Make a playable 3D game Example 3: Make a spreadsheet web app The list goes on. Some things can of course be done without JavaScript but tons of ideas would not only be infeasible to develop, they'd be a usability nightmare.
    - ForHackernews 8y ago
      Why do you want any of those things to run inside a browser? Those all sound like great candidates for being actual installed software. Do we even remember how to write that? This everything-is-a-website mentality is a disaster for privacy, security, and the future of decentralized general-purpose computing.
      - coding123 8y ago
        Both Java and C# tried to break the web (silverlight and Java FX) and both ended up being considerable failures. We still don't have a reasonably easy way to write cross-platform applications (Mac/Win/Lin/Phone) in a native-first language. The reason JS has taken off is because it filled a rather HUGE hole. If there is a chance that is changing, let us know, but right now, the hole isn't being filled with anything else.
        perrylaj 8y ago
        JavaFX is a GUI toolkit. It does allow the use of CSS for design, but is nothing like silver light, flash, etc. It's not mean to run in a browser at all. You probably meant Java applets?
fooey 8y ago
Speaking as a web developer myself, I 100% abandoned supporting users without javascript a decade ago The number of people with JS turned off are so small they don't matter, and on top of that, they're not monetizable, so I really don't care if the site works for them. There is virtually never any business rationale for making that extra effort.
- irq11 8y ago
  All the more reason to put the button in the browser. Give people the option to easily turn off the crap, and you’ll find out how much it matters.

chipotle_coyote 8y ago

The author's name is on the proposal, Craig Hockenberry. To avoid making folks Google for him, he's been running the Iconfactory, a design and programming consultancy that does, yes, icons, as well as web sites and applications. They're most famous for Twitterrific, the very first Twitter client (and the one that gave us the word "tweet" for Twitter posts as well as the blue bird icon). They've been in business over twenty years. Hockenberry is himself both an app developer and a long-time web developer. I'm not sure I particularly agree with this proposal, either, for a lot of reasons outlined in comments here (most broadly that this is putting too much of a burden on users, and that it's just likely to create a new round of cat-and-mouse games with bad actors to find ways around it), but the author certainly isn't inexperienced in web and application matters.

ghiculescu 8y ago
Also worth noting that he just launched a competing ad network: https://blog.iconfactory.com/2019/01/advertising-with-ollie/ https://blog.iconfactory.com/2019/01/advertising-with-ollie/
- chipotle_coyote 8y ago
  As near as I can tell the Twitterrific ad network literally only serves in-app ads to users of Twitterrific.
yuchi 8y ago
Exactly what I feared. It looked suspiciously too well written to be from someone not versed on the topic. I stand on my opinion: this proposal is antithetical to the web itself. (Doesn’t change the fact that I’ve always admired all their work, now that I know who is he)