3 ms·

I understand, but by this logic, no technology matters so long as it gets the pixels on the screen, because that's what the user ultimately sees. In that case,

I understand, but by this logic, no technology matters so long as it gets the pixels on the screen, because that's what the user ultimately sees. In that case, why even use HTML at all? Just upload a huge JPEG that looks like a page and call it a day. I think HTML vastly outgrew its use case because it kept avoiding breaking backward compatibility. It was obvious from the start, but we patched the lack of built-in templating with frames and then with AJAX.

austin-cheney 3y ago
That depends on how you define a user. In many cases this is too narrowly defined to a specific subset of visual users only and thus may present output that legally qualifies as discriminatory in many jurisdictions. What matters is not what is visually viewed according to a tracking metric but what is cognitively consumed by the intended audience such that it results in dedicated engagement or interaction. Again, whether or not HTML outgrew its business case is irrelevant to whether it is properly deployed to its consuming audience.
ungamedplayer 3y ago
A dynamic document format outgrew it's use case as a document format. Programming separates out presentation and logic (html and JavaScript). This is a good thing. I'd like to see the separation to go further. Locking presentation to logic language is a great way to stifle innovation, it's the same reason why we are not browsing the web through a pdf renderer. I'm sure Adobe would love that timeline.