7 ms·

> What do you think hx-get and hx-trigger Hx-attributes are not a new ‘templating syntax’, they’re custom attributes with a simple DSL for describing triggers

> What do you think hx-get and hx-trigger Hx-attributes are not a new ‘templating syntax’, they’re custom attributes with a simple DSL for describing triggers and swaps. You can prefix them with ‘data-‘ if you want and they will be 100% standards-conformant. HTML itself is full of these little in-attribute DSLs–look up the standard ‘autocomplete’ attribute: <textarea autocomplete="shipping street-address"></textarea> When people complain about this stuff, they just reveal they don’t know HTML. > …from the docs: "You would need to check on the server side for the HX-Request header… Yes, this is how HTTP content negotiation works. The client sends headers to the server describing what it wants and the server sends headers describing what it gives. I hope you’re not suggesting that htmx invented this technique. It’s kinda funny to suggest that htmx forces servers to ‘conform’ to something when most of today’s JS frameworks do server-side rendering only on JavaScript server runtimes.

troupo 3mo ago
> Hx-attributes are not a new ‘templating syntax’, They are. If you look at how they are processed by HTMX itself. > they’re custom attributes with a simple DSL At least you agree that it's a custom DSL > You can prefix them with ‘data-‘ if you want and they will be 100% standards-conformant. It doesn't matter if they are "standards compliant". The browser has literally no idea what they are, and what that DSL is. HTMX parses them, parses the DSL etc. Turn off Javascript and whatch how this beautiful standard-compliant stuff turns inert (or doesn't even load). > Yes, this is how HTTP content negotiation works. The client sends headers to the server describing what it wants That's not how content negotiation works. Standard content negotiation does not require custom headers, or the client needing to parse this header and be aware of anything to differentiate requests. There's are literal Content-Type and Accept standard headers. And yet HTMX invents its own flavor. > most of today’s JS frameworks do server-side rendering only on JavaScript server runtimes. Most of which AFAIR don't require custom headers.
- yawaramin 3mo ago
  You must be joking, React Flight Protocol for RSC is literally a new RPC system that comes with its own set of brand-new vulnerabilities. But sure, adding a couple of HTTP headers, which were designed for exactly this kind of use case (adding metadata to requests and responses), is a bridge too far.
  - troupo 3mo ago
    Because 1) React is the only framework out there and b) that somehow absolves HTMX or makes anything I said untrue
    - yawaramin 3mo ago
      Ok, take a look at the other popular frontend frameworks out there and tell me with a straight face that they don’t have their own mini-DSLs: https://docs.solidjs.com/concepts/control-flow/conditional-rendering https://docs.solidjs.com/concepts/control-flow/conditional-r... https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/template-syntax.html https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/template-syntax.html https://angular.dev/guide/templates#differences-from-standard-html https://angular.dev/guide/templates#differences-from-standar... None of which work with JavaScript turned off (unless you have a JavaScript backend and you wire it up to serve HTML). The criticisms I’m seeing here are all things that are accepted without question in other frameworks but when htmx does it, suddenly it’s too much.
      - troupo 3mo ago
        > The criticisms I’m seeing here are all things that are accepted without question Who said they are accepted without question? > when htmx does it, suddenly it’s too much. No, when HTMX and its proponents claim things that are objectively provably false, it's too much. Me: HTMX requires the server to be compliant with its DSL to work properly You: no it doesn't. It's literally how content negotiation works! <Thus admitting HTMX requires server to conform to HTMX to work properly> Me: there are literal standard headers for content negotiation You: but what about React, and other frameworks. Are we talking about React? Or other frameworks? We are talking about HTMx and your and others' claims about it. Me: HTMX is custom templates and custom DSL. You: no it's not! Me: yes, it is Me: It's standards compliant custom attributes and custom DSL. Why don't you look at all these other frameworks. At every step of your "argument" you keep confirming every word I'm saying while somehow presenting it as an argument. Try to actually learn something about tech you so fervently defend and to see how uour claims rarely differ from marketing bullshit (that marketing bullshit is often peddled by HTMx itself, most other frameworks are much more honest). At this point I'm tired of pointless arguing with reality-denying people. Adieu.

troupo 3mo ago

> Hx-attributes are not a new ‘templating syntax’, They are. If you look at how they are processed by HTMX itself. > they’re custom attributes with a simple DSL At least you agree that it's a custom DSL > You can prefix them with ‘data-‘ if you want and they will be 100% standards-conformant. It doesn't matter if they are "standards compliant". The browser has literally no idea what they are, and what that DSL is. HTMX parses them, parses the DSL etc. Turn off Javascript and whatch how this beautiful standard-compliant stuff turns inert (or doesn't even load). > Yes, this is how HTTP content negotiation works. The client sends headers to the server describing what it wants That's not how content negotiation works. Standard content negotiation does not require custom headers, or the client needing to parse this header and be aware of anything to differentiate requests. There's are literal Content-Type and Accept standard headers. And yet HTMX invents its own flavor. > most of today’s JS frameworks do server-side rendering only on JavaScript server runtimes. Most of which AFAIR don't require custom headers.

yawaramin 3mo ago
You must be joking, React Flight Protocol for RSC is literally a new RPC system that comes with its own set of brand-new vulnerabilities. But sure, adding a couple of HTTP headers, which were designed for exactly this kind of use case (adding metadata to requests and responses), is a bridge too far.
- troupo 3mo ago
  Because 1) React is the only framework out there and b) that somehow absolves HTMX or makes anything I said untrue
  - yawaramin 3mo ago
    Ok, take a look at the other popular frontend frameworks out there and tell me with a straight face that they don’t have their own mini-DSLs: https://docs.solidjs.com/concepts/control-flow/conditional-rendering https://docs.solidjs.com/concepts/control-flow/conditional-r... https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/template-syntax.html https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/template-syntax.html https://angular.dev/guide/templates#differences-from-standard-html https://angular.dev/guide/templates#differences-from-standar... None of which work with JavaScript turned off (unless you have a JavaScript backend and you wire it up to serve HTML). The criticisms I’m seeing here are all things that are accepted without question in other frameworks but when htmx does it, suddenly it’s too much.
    - troupo 3mo ago
      > The criticisms I’m seeing here are all things that are accepted without question Who said they are accepted without question? > when htmx does it, suddenly it’s too much. No, when HTMX and its proponents claim things that are objectively provably false, it's too much. Me: HTMX requires the server to be compliant with its DSL to work properly You: no it doesn't. It's literally how content negotiation works! <Thus admitting HTMX requires server to conform to HTMX to work properly> Me: there are literal standard headers for content negotiation You: but what about React, and other frameworks. Are we talking about React? Or other frameworks? We are talking about HTMx and your and others' claims about it. Me: HTMX is custom templates and custom DSL. You: no it's not! Me: yes, it is Me: It's standards compliant custom attributes and custom DSL. Why don't you look at all these other frameworks. At every step of your "argument" you keep confirming every word I'm saying while somehow presenting it as an argument. Try to actually learn something about tech you so fervently defend and to see how uour claims rarely differ from marketing bullshit (that marketing bullshit is often peddled by HTMx itself, most other frameworks are much more honest). At this point I'm tired of pointless arguing with reality-denying people. Adieu.