5 ms·

> Simply put, anything that talks HTTP and understands responses from a server is a hypermedia client to an extent. No, anything that understands hypermedia re

> Simply put, anything that talks HTTP and understands responses from a server is a hypermedia client to an extent. No, anything that understands hypermedia responses is a hypermedia client. Cat GIFs are not hypermedia so a cat GIF viewer is not a hypermedia client Maybe I'm overly grumpy this morning but words do actually have meanings that we can look up and refer to

troupo 3y ago
Yeah, I went overboard with the example. The issue is that HTMX tries to take over the concept of hypermedia as if it means only HTMX and whatever HTMX is doing :)
paulddraper 3y ago
> words do actually have meanings that we can look up and refer to It's odd to insist on strict word choice when transferring GIF images using the hypertext transfer protocol.
- masklinn 3y ago
  It's not though? Gifs are media, but they are not hypermedia because they don't support hypertext (can't link to to other media). As such, they're ancillary sub-resources to hypermedia but not themselves hypermedia.
  - flir 3y ago
    If you're going to get that picky (and please be aware I'm only doing this for the sake of the argument) media can never be hypermedia in the absence of the client. HTML opened in notepad is just text. Cat GIFs, rendered in the correct client, would absolutely be hypermedia (you could inline link data as QR codes, if you felt like being perverse). Hypermedia starts with the client, not with the file format.
    - ibotty 3y ago
      You are the one being overly picky. Of course given this gif-hypermedia-client your gif is hypermedia. But the client you mentioned above is not. How you transfer the data is irrelevant BTW. I don't get why you include that in your argument.
    - recursivedoubts 3y ago
      I agree that a hypermedia can't act properly within the uniform interface constraint, without a hypermedia client, that is, you can't have a hypermedia system without a proper hypermedia client: https://htmx.org/essays/hypermedia-clients/ https://htmx.org/essays/hypermedia-clients/ https://hypermedia.systems/hypermedia-components/ https://hypermedia.systems/hypermedia-components/ On the other hand, there is a real difference between plain text and HTML (or HXML, don't shoot!) which is a subset of text with additional concepts layered on top of it. This is akin to how JSON (or XML) is not hypermedia, but can be used to create hypermedia such as Siren or HXML. So I still think it makes sense to discuss if a media is or is not hypermedia without reference to the client, whereas it doesn't make sense to claim it is being used as hypermedia unless it is being consumed by a properly written hypermedia client. To make my thinking concrete, I believe Siren would continue to be hypermedia, even if it wasn't be consumed properly by a client, but then also you could not describe that pairing as a hypermedia system. (This is one reason I focus on the systemic nature of hypermedia, rather than solely on hypermedia formats) Semantic nitpicking perhaps, but then hypermedia discussions appear to tend to invite this sort of thing.
      - troupo 3y ago
        > HTML (or HXML, don't shoot!) which is a subset of text with additional concepts layered on top of it. This is akin to how JSON (or XML) is not hypermedia So, HTML is different from plain text because it "has concepts layered on top of text" where as JSON is not hypermedia despite "having concepts layered on top of text". And the only reason is because you said so. > So I still think it makes sense to discuss if a media is or is not hypermedia without reference to the client Then JSON is just as much hypermedia as HTML. Both are structured text unusable without a specific client to display them or work with them. > Semantic nitpicking perhaps, but then hypermedia discussions appear to tend to invite this sort of thing. They only invite them because of your insistence on calling only HTML the "natural hypermedia" etc.
  - troupo 3y ago
    Yeah. PDFs would be a better example. They can link to other media :) But I wouldn't be surprised if there's a crazy project somewhere using GIFs as a way to render HTML pages with clickable links :D

troupo 3y ago

Yeah, I went overboard with the example. The issue is that HTMX tries to take over the concept of hypermedia as if it means only HTMX and whatever HTMX is doing :)

paulddraper 3y ago

> words do actually have meanings that we can look up and refer to It's odd to insist on strict word choice when transferring GIF images using the hypertext transfer protocol.

masklinn 3y ago
It's not though? Gifs are media, but they are not hypermedia because they don't support hypertext (can't link to to other media). As such, they're ancillary sub-resources to hypermedia but not themselves hypermedia.
- flir 3y ago
  If you're going to get that picky (and please be aware I'm only doing this for the sake of the argument) media can never be hypermedia in the absence of the client. HTML opened in notepad is just text. Cat GIFs, rendered in the correct client, would absolutely be hypermedia (you could inline link data as QR codes, if you felt like being perverse). Hypermedia starts with the client, not with the file format.
  - ibotty 3y ago
    You are the one being overly picky. Of course given this gif-hypermedia-client your gif is hypermedia. But the client you mentioned above is not. How you transfer the data is irrelevant BTW. I don't get why you include that in your argument.
  - recursivedoubts 3y ago
    I agree that a hypermedia can't act properly within the uniform interface constraint, without a hypermedia client, that is, you can't have a hypermedia system without a proper hypermedia client: https://htmx.org/essays/hypermedia-clients/ https://htmx.org/essays/hypermedia-clients/ https://hypermedia.systems/hypermedia-components/ https://hypermedia.systems/hypermedia-components/ On the other hand, there is a real difference between plain text and HTML (or HXML, don't shoot!) which is a subset of text with additional concepts layered on top of it. This is akin to how JSON (or XML) is not hypermedia, but can be used to create hypermedia such as Siren or HXML. So I still think it makes sense to discuss if a media is or is not hypermedia without reference to the client, whereas it doesn't make sense to claim it is being used as hypermedia unless it is being consumed by a properly written hypermedia client. To make my thinking concrete, I believe Siren would continue to be hypermedia, even if it wasn't be consumed properly by a client, but then also you could not describe that pairing as a hypermedia system. (This is one reason I focus on the systemic nature of hypermedia, rather than solely on hypermedia formats) Semantic nitpicking perhaps, but then hypermedia discussions appear to tend to invite this sort of thing.
    - troupo 3y ago
      > HTML (or HXML, don't shoot!) which is a subset of text with additional concepts layered on top of it. This is akin to how JSON (or XML) is not hypermedia So, HTML is different from plain text because it "has concepts layered on top of text" where as JSON is not hypermedia despite "having concepts layered on top of text". And the only reason is because you said so. > So I still think it makes sense to discuss if a media is or is not hypermedia without reference to the client Then JSON is just as much hypermedia as HTML. Both are structured text unusable without a specific client to display them or work with them. > Semantic nitpicking perhaps, but then hypermedia discussions appear to tend to invite this sort of thing. They only invite them because of your insistence on calling only HTML the "natural hypermedia" etc.
- troupo 3y ago
  Yeah. PDFs would be a better example. They can link to other media :) But I wouldn't be surprised if there's a crazy project somewhere using GIFs as a way to render HTML pages with clickable links :D