5 ms·
FWIW, I started going this direction and ended up taking one step back and settling on Markdown. The reason was I realized an HTML renderer is still a pretty he
by anderspitman 6y ago
FWIW, I started going this direction and ended up taking one step back and settling on Markdown. The reason was I realized an HTML renderer is still a pretty heavy dependency to consume my content.
The upshot is you can now browse my blog with curl or netcat:
curl https://apitman.com/txt/feed
nc apitman.com 2052 <<< /txt/feed
I may switch to another format in the future. It doesn't matter much as long as it's readable as plain text.
- petepete 6y agoI tend to write in Slim, it does an excellent job of removing most of the tag noise from HTML while giving you more flexibility than Markdown. https://slim-lang.com https://slim-lang.com
- moonchild 6y agoSlim doesn't look particularly interesting for majority-plaintext applications. It doesn't let you add nodes inline, so things like emphasis or links become much more verbose.
- petepete 6y agoYeah, that's the main weakness. Being able to drop down to markdown from within Slim alleviates the problem to a degree.
- GoblinSlayer 6y agoYou can read simple html as plain text just fine.
- anderspitman 6y agoMaybe for some definitions of "you"
- falcolas 6y agoAs long as the HTML file is not minified, they're quite readable. <p>It's just plain text with some markup</p>.
- GoblinSlayer 6y agohttps://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ html is unreadable?