4 ms·

true, but HTML-only websites are often pretty clunky infuriatingly, if HTML had just a bit more oomph, we could make a lot better websites with it, but they ha

true, but HTML-only websites are often pretty clunky infuriatingly, if HTML had just a bit more oomph, we could make a lot better websites with it, but they haven't been moving HTML forward as a hypermedia for decades now (see https://htmx.org https://htmx.org for what I mean, they could implement this concept in the browser in a week, and it would change web development dramatically) the upcoming view transitions API will help: https://github.com/WICG/view-transitions https://github.com/WICG/view-transitions but, still, there are some really obvious and simple things that could be done to make HTML much more compelling (maybe let's start by making PUT, PATCH and DELETE available in HTML!)

JodieBenitez 4y ago
HTMX is great ! So much can be done without even any scripting client-side.
- account-5 4y ago
  Isn't htmx implemented in JavaScript which is downloaded clientside so you can use the hx- directives?
  - recursivedoubts 4y ago
    i think they mean "user written js"
  - JodieBenitez 4y ago
    Yes it is implemented in Javascript. You don't have to write JS yourself in your application though. Not that I can't write Javascript, it's just that some things are a lot easier with hx directives.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    HTMX is a "HTML library" rather than a JS library. It just happens to be implemented in JS for necessary reasons.
ksec 4y ago
>see https://htmx.org https://htmx.org for what I mean, they could implement this concept in the browser in a week, and it would change web development dramatically) Yes. Has anyone ever purpose it?
- recursivedoubts 4y ago
  i tried to propose it a few times, but I'm a crazy man in montana, and I don't have a lot of pull hopefully at some point someone will notice it
  - milsorgen 4y ago
    Kudos to you for trying.
  - no_wizard 4y ago
    If you had a browser build as a working implementation you’d get a ton of interest quite quickly
    - recursivedoubts 4y ago
      best I can do is one hacked up javascript library
pphysch 4y ago
If browsers natively supported HTMX features (and possibly _hyperscript) that would be a total game changer. Well, at least it's no trouble to include these two libraries and bring your clients into the 21st century of hypertext. But doing so without JS would be amazing.
pdntspa 4y ago
> PUT, PATCH and DELETE Is this really that much better than POST http://www.mysite.com/thing/100/delete http://www.mysite.com/thing/100/delete ? GET and POST have actual client-side implementation differences. The rest is simply semantics. I love REST but these extra verbs seem redundant.
- recursivedoubts 4y ago
  If you are treating URLs as references to resources, you want the ability to CRUD those resources. PUT and DELETE correspond with U and D, so they make sense to include. PATCH is a little less obviously useful (partial update vs. a full update w/ a PUT.) Regardless of our feelings about them, they are there in HTTP, the HyperText Transfer Protocol. So maybe we should make them accessible through the HyperText we are transferring.
  - pdntspa 4y ago
    I really doubt the world is going to standardize over that specific style of implementation and, frankly, the semantic web is dead. Long live the bazaar...
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      Those are literally standards. With very specific semantics and expectations https://github.com/for-GET/know-your-http-well/blob/master/methods.md https://github.com/for-GET/know-your-http-well/blob/master/m...
      - pdntspa 4y ago
        And the number of projects that I have seen follow them is fewer than the number of projects that just seem to wing it. Which is my point... perhaps this standard is superficial and unnecessary, and maybe we should discard it. IETF/whoever can write whatever they want, I only care about what I actually encounter. That's "standardization" edit- All those nice looking checkboxes depend on the individual implementation. It's a nice concept but how many projects have actually implemented it to the conventions about idempotency/etc shown? edit2- who is for-GET anyway? A random github link doesn't have much more worth than a random Medium link
rmbyrro 4y ago
Funny. I was expecting the article in a pure HTML page. Instead, it has a rainbow of CSS & JS.
tjoff 4y ago
Clunky, how? If anything I'd associate javascript with clunkyness.
- recursivedoubts 4y ago
  Well, I think a lot of people (developers at least) associate SPA-type web applications with smoother transitions, etc. I agree with you to an extent: I've had some very bad experiences with javascript applications as well, but the general sentiment is (reasonably, in my opinion) that a well done SPA will feel smoother than a well done MPA W/ htmx or similar libraries like unpoly or hotwire, you can close this gap. The big difference is the ability to update partial bits of HTML, rather than needing to do a full page refresh.
- nickstinemates 4y ago
  As a predominantly (hobbyist) systems developer, the pervasiveness of NPM is a major detractor for website development. I have done a few Angular and React apps to keep the skills sharp. The imposed workflow for the power is an interesting set of tradeoffs, never mind the magic and amount of decisions you need to make to use both. Add on top of that the rest of npm, nvm, css compilers, the various css toolkits for layout, and the rest and it just feels so complicated, even for the most basic page which needs to pull in some data over an api. It doesn't seem to be getting any simpler.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  Lets say you want something as simple as a table-of-contents. If you're doing HTML, you gotta render this yourself. In Wordpress or webpage generators like Jekyll or Hugo, table-of-contents generated from H1 / H2 headers is basically just one line. Lets say you want to sort all your posts by date and paginate the results (say, 20 results per page or something), as per typical blogging patterns. That's a lot of HTML cruft you gotta make for this to happen. Meanwhile, Wordpress / Jekyll / Hugo (etc. etc.) do this all automatically for you.
  - drpixie 4y ago
    I don't think it matters what generates the page. Wordpress/etc could generate plain html pages and the author's points would apply equally. Personally, I prefer html with a little embedded css. It works, it's quick, it's all in one place, and it lets me produce suitably elegant pages.
quickthrower2 4y ago
HTMX can do a lot and it just requires not being dogmatic about avoiding the server doing some work every now and then and sending perhaps a little more data down the wire.

JodieBenitez 4y ago

HTMX is great ! So much can be done without even any scripting client-side.

account-5 4y ago
Isn't htmx implemented in JavaScript which is downloaded clientside so you can use the hx- directives?
- recursivedoubts 4y ago
  i think they mean "user written js"
- JodieBenitez 4y ago
  Yes it is implemented in Javascript. You don't have to write JS yourself in your application though. Not that I can't write Javascript, it's just that some things are a lot easier with hx directives.
- pphysch 4y ago
  HTMX is a "HTML library" rather than a JS library. It just happens to be implemented in JS for necessary reasons.

ksec 4y ago

>see https://htmx.org https://htmx.org for what I mean, they could implement this concept in the browser in a week, and it would change web development dramatically) Yes. Has anyone ever purpose it?

recursivedoubts 4y ago
i tried to propose it a few times, but I'm a crazy man in montana, and I don't have a lot of pull hopefully at some point someone will notice it
- milsorgen 4y ago
  Kudos to you for trying.
- no_wizard 4y ago
  If you had a browser build as a working implementation you’d get a ton of interest quite quickly
  - recursivedoubts 4y ago
    best I can do is one hacked up javascript library

pphysch 4y ago

If browsers natively supported HTMX features (and possibly _hyperscript) that would be a total game changer. Well, at least it's no trouble to include these two libraries and bring your clients into the 21st century of hypertext. But doing so without JS would be amazing.

pdntspa 4y ago

> PUT, PATCH and DELETE Is this really that much better than POST http://www.mysite.com/thing/100/delete http://www.mysite.com/thing/100/delete ? GET and POST have actual client-side implementation differences. The rest is simply semantics. I love REST but these extra verbs seem redundant.

recursivedoubts 4y ago
If you are treating URLs as references to resources, you want the ability to CRUD those resources. PUT and DELETE correspond with U and D, so they make sense to include. PATCH is a little less obviously useful (partial update vs. a full update w/ a PUT.) Regardless of our feelings about them, they are there in HTTP, the HyperText Transfer Protocol. So maybe we should make them accessible through the HyperText we are transferring.
- pdntspa 4y ago
  I really doubt the world is going to standardize over that specific style of implementation and, frankly, the semantic web is dead. Long live the bazaar...
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    Those are literally standards. With very specific semantics and expectations https://github.com/for-GET/know-your-http-well/blob/master/methods.md https://github.com/for-GET/know-your-http-well/blob/master/m...
    - pdntspa 4y ago
      And the number of projects that I have seen follow them is fewer than the number of projects that just seem to wing it. Which is my point... perhaps this standard is superficial and unnecessary, and maybe we should discard it. IETF/whoever can write whatever they want, I only care about what I actually encounter. That's "standardization" edit- All those nice looking checkboxes depend on the individual implementation. It's a nice concept but how many projects have actually implemented it to the conventions about idempotency/etc shown? edit2- who is for-GET anyway? A random github link doesn't have much more worth than a random Medium link

rmbyrro 4y ago

Funny. I was expecting the article in a pure HTML page. Instead, it has a rainbow of CSS & JS.

tjoff 4y ago

Clunky, how? If anything I'd associate javascript with clunkyness.

recursivedoubts 4y ago
Well, I think a lot of people (developers at least) associate SPA-type web applications with smoother transitions, etc. I agree with you to an extent: I've had some very bad experiences with javascript applications as well, but the general sentiment is (reasonably, in my opinion) that a well done SPA will feel smoother than a well done MPA W/ htmx or similar libraries like unpoly or hotwire, you can close this gap. The big difference is the ability to update partial bits of HTML, rather than needing to do a full page refresh.
nickstinemates 4y ago
As a predominantly (hobbyist) systems developer, the pervasiveness of NPM is a major detractor for website development. I have done a few Angular and React apps to keep the skills sharp. The imposed workflow for the power is an interesting set of tradeoffs, never mind the magic and amount of decisions you need to make to use both. Add on top of that the rest of npm, nvm, css compilers, the various css toolkits for layout, and the rest and it just feels so complicated, even for the most basic page which needs to pull in some data over an api. It doesn't seem to be getting any simpler.
dragontamer 4y ago
Lets say you want something as simple as a table-of-contents. If you're doing HTML, you gotta render this yourself. In Wordpress or webpage generators like Jekyll or Hugo, table-of-contents generated from H1 / H2 headers is basically just one line. Lets say you want to sort all your posts by date and paginate the results (say, 20 results per page or something), as per typical blogging patterns. That's a lot of HTML cruft you gotta make for this to happen. Meanwhile, Wordpress / Jekyll / Hugo (etc. etc.) do this all automatically for you.
- drpixie 4y ago
  I don't think it matters what generates the page. Wordpress/etc could generate plain html pages and the author's points would apply equally. Personally, I prefer html with a little embedded css. It works, it's quick, it's all in one place, and it lets me produce suitably elegant pages.

quickthrower2 4y ago

HTMX can do a lot and it just requires not being dogmatic about avoiding the server doing some work every now and then and sending perhaps a little more data down the wire.