8 ms·

This was definitely built to solve a very specific problem in a very specific way, I think you're asking too much of it. It's just a handy shortcut for buildin

by ehnto 6y ago

This was definitely built to solve a very specific problem in a very specific way, I think you're asking too much of it. It's just a handy shortcut for building a landing page in like 20 minutes or sprucing up your "haven't gotten around to writing the CSS yet" web app so you can kick it out the door.

larsga 6y ago
The point is that the marketing is false. This CSS framework forces to you to abuse HTML semantics if you want to use it, which is exactly what it claims it doesn't do. What's extra frustrating is that it would be so easy to fix, by just adding a few classes. But they wanted to be "semantic", so they forced their users to be unsemantic.
- IggleSniggle 6y ago
  Or they could have just used arbitrary elements, like <myelement>. Folks forget that this is valid HTML, and it’s just treated as a div.
  - recursive 6y ago
    I don't think they forgot, because it was never true. It needs a dash `-` in it. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#valid-custom-element-name https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#valid-custom-element-name
    - folmar 6y ago
      It needs them now, but it wasn't always the case. In html5-20121025 User agents must treat elements and attributes that they do not understand as semantically neutral. It was also in the grey area in HTML4.01 spec, note B.1 provides for user agents rendering any unknown elements.
      - Conlectus 6y ago
        Semantically neutral yes, but they are not divs -- they're "unknown elements", which have more annoying behavior (similar to pseudoelements from memory)
        ehnto 6y ago
        I think that's right. They start out life as inline-block elements.
forgotmypw17 6y ago
A landing page with huge accessibility issues
- scrollaway 6y ago
  I wonder how you justify your use of the word "huge" here, given that it'll most likely be far better than most landing pages out there and not everyone will use the problematic components.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    I think this comment makes a pretty clear case for it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25168303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25168303 For me personally, the accessibility issues would be with elements used out of their usual role. For example: When I, blessed with being sighted at this time, but without a mouse, ask my browser to identify the clickable/actionable elements on the page, it mis-identifies both unclickable elements as clickable, and clickable elements as unclickable. I would call that a serious usability issue. And if I was not sighted, using a screen-reader, I would be very confused indeed by this landing page. I agree that whether this qualifies as a "huge" usability issue is indeed a matter of opinion. I would certainly argue that it is a huge usability issue.
    - ehnto 6y ago
      Using the software you've got, would using role attributes be a sufficient workaround?
- noneeeed 6y ago
  Accessibility is not something I know much about (I mostly work backend). What's the issue with this type of approach? I was tempted to use it as a starting point for a little side project, but Id rather not start with something with inherent accessibility issues.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago

by ehnto 6y ago

larsga 6y ago

The point is that the marketing is false. This CSS framework forces to you to abuse HTML semantics if you want to use it, which is exactly what it claims it doesn't do. What's extra frustrating is that it would be so easy to fix, by just adding a few classes. But they wanted to be "semantic", so they forced their users to be unsemantic.

IggleSniggle 6y ago
Or they could have just used arbitrary elements, like <myelement>. Folks forget that this is valid HTML, and it’s just treated as a div.
- recursive 6y ago
  I don't think they forgot, because it was never true. It needs a dash `-` in it. https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#valid-custom-element-name https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#valid-custom-element-name
  - folmar 6y ago
    It needs them now, but it wasn't always the case. In html5-20121025 User agents must treat elements and attributes that they do not understand as semantically neutral. It was also in the grey area in HTML4.01 spec, note B.1 provides for user agents rendering any unknown elements.
    - Conlectus 6y ago
      Semantically neutral yes, but they are not divs -- they're "unknown elements", which have more annoying behavior (similar to pseudoelements from memory)
      - ehnto 6y ago
        I think that's right. They start out life as inline-block elements.

forgotmypw17 6y ago

A landing page with huge accessibility issues

scrollaway 6y ago
I wonder how you justify your use of the word "huge" here, given that it'll most likely be far better than most landing pages out there and not everyone will use the problematic components.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  I think this comment makes a pretty clear case for it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25168303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25168303 For me personally, the accessibility issues would be with elements used out of their usual role. For example: When I, blessed with being sighted at this time, but without a mouse, ask my browser to identify the clickable/actionable elements on the page, it mis-identifies both unclickable elements as clickable, and clickable elements as unclickable. I would call that a serious usability issue. And if I was not sighted, using a screen-reader, I would be very confused indeed by this landing page. I agree that whether this qualifies as a "huge" usability issue is indeed a matter of opinion. I would certainly argue that it is a huge usability issue.
  - ehnto 6y ago
    Using the software you've got, would using role attributes be a sufficient workaround?
noneeeed 6y ago
Accessibility is not something I know much about (I mostly work backend). What's the issue with this type of approach? I was tempted to use it as a starting point for a little side project, but Id rather not start with something with inherent accessibility issues.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago