6 ms·

I don't think "handmade" should be taken to literally, but rather be attached the meaning as described below. In my experience there tends to be a strong corre

I don't think "handmade" should be taken to literally, but rather be attached the meaning as described below. In my experience there tends to be a strong correlation between a website being hand-written and the quality of the content on the website. My hypothesis is that it somehow hits the sweetspot between: - creating your own SSG and only writing mundane blogposts about how you wrote that SSG (am guilty of this) - and pumping out raw thoughts on Twitter/Wordpress/Medium/Substack etc. I think that is at least part of what this website is trying to capture.

franklampard 6y ago
adjective: hand-written written with a pen, pencil, or other handheld implement. ...?
- judge2020 6y ago
  All websites are the result of a human pushing power through a cpu and sending low voltage signals to it via a keyboard, so in a way all are handmade. That's why so many are wondering what qualifies as handmaid to this site's author - site builders like Wix-created sites probably don't count but do SSGs count? What about using _any_ css framework?
  - swayvil 6y ago
    Tho it's hard to define, it's pretty easy to distinguish. I think this could be said about much of reality.
- reaperducer 6y ago
  adjective: hand-written written with a pen, pencil, or other handheld implement. Lately I've been writing my personal web pages on my TRS-80 Model 100. I can hold that in my hands.
masswerk 6y ago
In my experience, markdown doesn't offer much advantage over HTML, as writing a few short tags isn't much of a burden. (Even more so, if you use the old-style `b` and `i` phrase elements, which are apparently considered ok again. Personally, I still use `strong`, etc, which may be the most annoying feature for hand-written HTML. But this can be fixed by an editor shortcut.) Otherwise, a bit of server-side scripting for adding headers and footers and providing navigation is fine, but probably already outside the specs of "entirely handmade".
- yoz-y 6y ago
 For me the difference between writing markdown and writing HTML directly is that if I use the latter, I won't actually write the darn article. HTML is pretty bad for re-reading and editing, as the tags get in the way.
 - dheera 6y ago
 I find the opposite. I almost never use Markdown unless forced to. I find it much easier to remember <a href="https://foo.com"><img src="foo.jpg" width="300" alt="foo"></a> that some [foo(foo.jpg)] or is it (http://foo.com)[(foo.jpg)(alt=alt text)] or is it [foo.com(foo.jpg) width=300] or is it (foo.com)[foo.jpg](alt text)[::width="300"] ...? I can never remember the goddamn inconsistent syntax. and is it 2 asterisks for bold, 1 for italic, or 1 and 2, or is it 2 and 3? With html it's this is bold this is italic this is bold and italic Much easier to remember.
 - masswerk 6y ago
 Same here.
 - TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
 Same problem for me. these syntaxes now suffer the same problem that forum software went through... each has their own syntax and they are not usually compatible. HTML, for better or worse, is the syntax we all know by heart and is universal.

franklampard 6y ago

adjective: hand-written written with a pen, pencil, or other handheld implement. ...?

judge2020 6y ago
All websites are the result of a human pushing power through a cpu and sending low voltage signals to it via a keyboard, so in a way all are handmade. That's why so many are wondering what qualifies as handmaid to this site's author - site builders like Wix-created sites probably don't count but do SSGs count? What about using _any_ css framework?
- swayvil 6y ago
  Tho it's hard to define, it's pretty easy to distinguish. I think this could be said about much of reality.
reaperducer 6y ago
adjective: hand-written written with a pen, pencil, or other handheld implement. Lately I've been writing my personal web pages on my TRS-80 Model 100. I can hold that in my hands.

masswerk 6y ago

In my experience, markdown doesn't offer much advantage over HTML, as writing a few short tags isn't much of a burden. (Even more so, if you use the old-style `b` and `i` phrase elements, which are apparently considered ok again. Personally, I still use `strong`, etc, which may be the most annoying feature for hand-written HTML. But this can be fixed by an editor shortcut.) Otherwise, a bit of server-side scripting for adding headers and footers and providing navigation is fine, but probably already outside the specs of "entirely handmade".

yoz-y 6y ago
For me the difference between writing markdown and writing HTML directly is that if I use the latter, I won't actually write the darn article. HTML is pretty bad for re-reading and editing, as the tags get in the way.
- dheera 6y ago
 I find the opposite. I almost never use Markdown unless forced to. I find it much easier to remember <a href="https://foo.com"><img src="foo.jpg" width="300" alt="foo"></a> that some [foo(foo.jpg)] or is it (http://foo.com)[(foo.jpg)(alt=alt text)] or is it [foo.com(foo.jpg) width=300] or is it (foo.com)[foo.jpg](alt text)[::width="300"] ...? I can never remember the goddamn inconsistent syntax. and is it 2 asterisks for bold, 1 for italic, or 1 and 2, or is it 2 and 3? With html it's this is bold this is italic this is bold and italic Much easier to remember.
 - masswerk 6y ago
 Same here.
 - TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
 Same problem for me. these syntaxes now suffer the same problem that forum software went through... each has their own syntax and they are not usually compatible. HTML, for better or worse, is the syntax we all know by heart and is universal.