4 ms·
Developers can already do this. They can just use HTML. Plain old HTML. They don't have to use JavaScript. They don't have to use CSS. They can just use plain b
by jasonlotito 6y ago
Developers can already do this. They can just use HTML. Plain old HTML. They don't have to use JavaScript. They don't have to use CSS. They can just use plain boring HTML. That they can do this now makes me ask the question: what problem are we solving? If people aren't using the existing solution enough, and the existing solution solves the "issues" of CSS and JavaScript being used, then what is the problem?
- chacha2 6y agoThe global spynet, the waste of computing devices that need to be constantly upgraded to handle the new minimum requirements of the web and the degrading accessibility of many websites.
- enumjorge 6y agoYes those are problems, but we already have a technical solution to address that, plain HTML. But content providers aren’t using that. They aren’t incentivized to do so. Forking web technologies attempts to solve the already-solved technical problem without addressing the real problem which is how do you incentivize people to create content without all the bloat?
- sergeykish 6y agoTechnology is here, each modern browser can be restricted to HTML only per page by user. If it is not enough use NetSurf, Dillo, a bunch of console browsers.
- hinkley 6y agoWhat people can do and what the will do have very little in common. Without the cooperation of my coworkers, bosses, and third party suppliers, very little of what I do will stick, and I have to be clever or at least subtle for that to happen. Any broad-stroke things like 'Just use HTML'? You've got to be kidding.
- boomlinde 6y agosolderpunk addressed this (in terms of Gemini): https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/gemini.circumlunar.space/%7Esolderpunk/cornedbeef/why-not-just-use-a-subset-of-http-and-html.gmi https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/gemini.circumlunar.space/%7Eso...