4 ms·

I don't think that is an unpopular opinion, since I am of the same. I agree with you that the URL is the most important feature of the web. Without it, you cou

I don't think that is an unpopular opinion, since I am of the same. I agree with you that the URL is the most important feature of the web. Without it, you could just as well deploy native apps because it wouldn't really make that much of a difference. Without javascript and a heavy client side, I wouldn't have a job today since the application I build is simply not possible to create with just html+css. Sure there are many web pages that don't need to be a SPA, but a lot of other webpages do need it. I think an increasing amount of webpages are not simply text documents but we can easily see a move from traditional applications to web applications. It's obvious why, it is truly a "write once, run everywhere" scenario, it's easy to scale on many different devices and there is little to no advantages to write a native app in most circumstances. The document web has already been done, just use wordpress or whatever framework to create those sites but the new exciting web for me is the more interactive web where we can seriously move heavy apps into the browser.

godshatter 7y ago
What we need, in my opinion, is a new protocol. Leave http(s) for documents and make a new protocol designed from the ground up for interactive applications. That solves the problem of trying to shove an application into a document viewing sub-system and should allow for more creativity and efficiency, depending on what this new protocol turns out to be. What's happening now is like trying to force ftp to show documents, with markup, and forms, and so forth when it's just supposed to transfer data.
- krapp 7y ago
  The possibility for HTML documents to support inline scripting was considered even prior to HTML 4[0]. The script tag itself is decades old now, it's supposed to be there and it's as legitimate an element as any other. The web was never intended to only ever be static, nor is scripting in the browser somehow a corruption or aberration of the web's original purpose. If anything, the web should have been a lot more programmable[1] than it turned out to be. [0]https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/SPSD-html32-20180315/#script https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/SPSD-html32-20180315/#script [1]https://eager.io/blog/a-brief-history-of-weird-scripting-languages/ https://eager.io/blog/a-brief-history-of-weird-scripting-lan...
- ecmascript 7y ago
  Maybe that would make it better, maybe not. It's hard to get everyone on the same page working together on a platform that noone ownes. If it was easy, there would have been several protocols in use already. I am content with what we got and are happy about it. I think it works pretty great after all.
  - godshatter 7y ago
    I'm not so happy with it, since I'm tired of trying to figure out which domains to allow javascript from when practically every page has a list of a dozen or more. I'm tired of trying to run pages that don't work with any of the browsers I have access to on linux, despite html being a standard. The whole paradigm seems broken to me. It just feels like a monumental kludge.
    - ecmascript 7y ago
      > any of the browsers I have access to on linux I use linux as well and I have yet to find a webpage that doesn't work with Firefox and Brave. Maybe you shouldn't block javascript and instead block trackers and ads. There are a lot of tools to do that like uBlock Origin, pi-hole, privacy badger etc. Javascript is used by pretty much all websites today to do mostly other stuff than tracking. Why are you blocking it if I may ask? Also, I am very curious (I really am), what websites do you visit daily? I'm sure at least some of them are depending on javascript and couldn't be solved with html+css alone?
      - godshatter 7y ago
        I've had a few sites that wouldn't work for me without booting up my windows laptop and running edge. One of them is the place I make car payments. I use uBlock Origin at home. I use NoScript at work. I like it because it blocks ads and because it does break much of the web. I don't want auto-playing videos, I don't want an enhanced experience, I just want to find the information I'm looking for. If the website I go to won't show me anything even after enabling the main domain and a CDN, then I move on to the next choice. Enabling js on the main domain usually makes menus and such work. The rest seems to be ad-related, from what I can tell. There are a handful of sites where I really am looking for an enhanced experience. Mainly my banking sites, sites I frequent for shopping, and some forums. Most other places I visit I'm happy that the site is mostly broken as long as I can see what I went there to find. In many cases, I'd be happier with a 90's era gray page with text and pictures. But then I'm old.
- BlueTemplar 7y ago
  Don't we already have that with TCP and/or UDP ?
BlueTemplar 7y ago
Isn't it pretty hacky to use a Web browser for that instead of a dedicated virtual machine ?
- ecmascript 7y ago
  For what exactly?

godshatter 7y ago

What we need, in my opinion, is a new protocol. Leave http(s) for documents and make a new protocol designed from the ground up for interactive applications. That solves the problem of trying to shove an application into a document viewing sub-system and should allow for more creativity and efficiency, depending on what this new protocol turns out to be. What's happening now is like trying to force ftp to show documents, with markup, and forms, and so forth when it's just supposed to transfer data.

krapp 7y ago
The possibility for HTML documents to support inline scripting was considered even prior to HTML 4[0]. The script tag itself is decades old now, it's supposed to be there and it's as legitimate an element as any other. The web was never intended to only ever be static, nor is scripting in the browser somehow a corruption or aberration of the web's original purpose. If anything, the web should have been a lot more programmable[1] than it turned out to be. [0]https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/SPSD-html32-20180315/#script https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/SPSD-html32-20180315/#script [1]https://eager.io/blog/a-brief-history-of-weird-scripting-languages/ https://eager.io/blog/a-brief-history-of-weird-scripting-lan...
ecmascript 7y ago
Maybe that would make it better, maybe not. It's hard to get everyone on the same page working together on a platform that noone ownes. If it was easy, there would have been several protocols in use already. I am content with what we got and are happy about it. I think it works pretty great after all.
- godshatter 7y ago
  I'm not so happy with it, since I'm tired of trying to figure out which domains to allow javascript from when practically every page has a list of a dozen or more. I'm tired of trying to run pages that don't work with any of the browsers I have access to on linux, despite html being a standard. The whole paradigm seems broken to me. It just feels like a monumental kludge.
  - ecmascript 7y ago
    > any of the browsers I have access to on linux I use linux as well and I have yet to find a webpage that doesn't work with Firefox and Brave. Maybe you shouldn't block javascript and instead block trackers and ads. There are a lot of tools to do that like uBlock Origin, pi-hole, privacy badger etc. Javascript is used by pretty much all websites today to do mostly other stuff than tracking. Why are you blocking it if I may ask? Also, I am very curious (I really am), what websites do you visit daily? I'm sure at least some of them are depending on javascript and couldn't be solved with html+css alone?
    - godshatter 7y ago
      I've had a few sites that wouldn't work for me without booting up my windows laptop and running edge. One of them is the place I make car payments. I use uBlock Origin at home. I use NoScript at work. I like it because it blocks ads and because it does break much of the web. I don't want auto-playing videos, I don't want an enhanced experience, I just want to find the information I'm looking for. If the website I go to won't show me anything even after enabling the main domain and a CDN, then I move on to the next choice. Enabling js on the main domain usually makes menus and such work. The rest seems to be ad-related, from what I can tell. There are a handful of sites where I really am looking for an enhanced experience. Mainly my banking sites, sites I frequent for shopping, and some forums. Most other places I visit I'm happy that the site is mostly broken as long as I can see what I went there to find. In many cases, I'd be happier with a 90's era gray page with text and pictures. But then I'm old.
BlueTemplar 7y ago
Don't we already have that with TCP and/or UDP ?

BlueTemplar 7y ago

Isn't it pretty hacky to use a Web browser for that instead of a dedicated virtual machine ?

ecmascript 7y ago
For what exactly?