4 ms·

> And I don't see the need to use a SPA almost anywhere. Did I advocate for that in any way? > If you are gonna use a SPA for stuff that really doesn't requir

by Timon3 3y ago

> And I don't see the need to use a SPA almost anywhere. Did I advocate for that in any way? > If you are gonna use a SPA for stuff that really doesn't require it, I think it behooves you to still atleast try to conform the the HTTP spec Why? Give me a good reason why it's worth the effort for small tools I write.

shkkmo 3y ago
> Why? Give me a good reason why it's worth the effort for small tools I write Why are you using SPAs with internal routing for small tools? An SPA only needs to use urls to represent states that should be externally reachable. If you want those states to be externally reachable, then you probably want those states to be indexable by search engines. You also want users to know if a url is mistyped/miscopied and a 404 response page does a good job of that. In the end, given the spec, it is on you to carefully consider amd have a good reason to go against the recommendations.
- Timon3 3y ago
  > Why are you using SPAs with internal routing for small tools? Because I don't use a server if I can help it. Client-side routing is wonderfully easy to use and provides a great user experience. What good does it for me to pre-render the sites or host it on a server where I can route server-side if client-side routing works perfectly for what I write? > An SPA only needs to use urls to represent states that should be externally reachable. "Needs" does a lot here. My tools integrate with browser history for navigation, so I need URLs for that as well. But I often make state available in the query, so it's externally reachable. > If you want those states to be externally reachable, then you probably want those states to be indexable by search engines. No. > You also want users to know if a url is mistyped/miscopied and a 404 response page does a good job of that. I do, and client-side routing gives users a wonderful 404 page. No need for serving a status 404. > In the end, given the spec, it is on you to carefully consider amd have a good reason to go against the recommendations. I've given good reasons. You haven't so far.

by Timon3 3y ago

shkkmo 3y ago

> Why? Give me a good reason why it's worth the effort for small tools I write Why are you using SPAs with internal routing for small tools? An SPA only needs to use urls to represent states that should be externally reachable. If you want those states to be externally reachable, then you probably want those states to be indexable by search engines. You also want users to know if a url is mistyped/miscopied and a 404 response page does a good job of that. In the end, given the spec, it is on you to carefully consider amd have a good reason to go against the recommendations.

Timon3 3y ago
> Why are you using SPAs with internal routing for small tools? Because I don't use a server if I can help it. Client-side routing is wonderfully easy to use and provides a great user experience. What good does it for me to pre-render the sites or host it on a server where I can route server-side if client-side routing works perfectly for what I write? > An SPA only needs to use urls to represent states that should be externally reachable. "Needs" does a lot here. My tools integrate with browser history for navigation, so I need URLs for that as well. But I often make state available in the query, so it's externally reachable. > If you want those states to be externally reachable, then you probably want those states to be indexable by search engines. No. > You also want users to know if a url is mistyped/miscopied and a 404 response page does a good job of that. I do, and client-side routing gives users a wonderful 404 page. No need for serving a status 404. > In the end, given the spec, it is on you to carefully consider amd have a good reason to go against the recommendations. I've given good reasons. You haven't so far.