4 ms·
I'm not sure that's the case, there are a number of the sites on this list, like Facebook and Reddit, that I definitely wouldn't categorize as document-oriented
by dpau 8y ago
I'm not sure that's the case, there are a number of the sites on this list, like Facebook and Reddit, that I definitely wouldn't categorize as document-oriented. It seems more of an issue with both how resource intensive the JS-heavy sites are, as well as the purpose of the JS- is it used to track me and invade my privacy, or does the JS have a legitimate use (as in a chat application)? Personally I LOVE JS-powered websites/webapps, as it means that as a lone developer I have the ability to create a website as powerful as a desktop application, without developing multiple versions for each OS/app store. So I, too, don't wish to see a massive backlash against JS, only against bad JS.
- TeMPOraL 8y agoFacebook we could dispute once we include the chat (though the chat is available as separate Messenger site/app), but without it it's almost entirely a document-oriented experience. Profiles, timeline, posts, comments - those are all just glorified documents with forms. The same is true about the entirety of Reddit - it's document-oriented by nature. Consider HN as an example of a document-oriented social media site actually implemented as documents.
- dpau 8y agoEven the chat application mentioned previously could be viewed as (and implemented as) "documents with forms". This oversimplification doesn't help us much. It's the powerful, real-time interactivity that javascript provides that is being debated here.
- naniwaduni 8y agoThe question is whether the real-time interactivity is desirable. For a chat widget, it almost certainly is. It's less clear for something like Reddit, where the main mechanism for getting updates to the page you're currently viewing is to explicitly refresh.