4 ms·
The problem with meteor (and similar frameworks): curl -s https://www.meteor.com/blog/2014/08/26/meteor-090-new-packaging-system \ | sed -e '/[<]head
by pdkl95 12y ago
The problem with meteor (and similar frameworks):
curl -s https://www.meteor.com/blog/2014/08/26/meteor-090-new-packaging-system \
| sed -e '/[<]head[>]/,/[<]\/head[>]/ d'
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<body>
</body>
</html>
If you want someone to read your article, actually sending that article would be useful. If that article has advanced features that require javascript, flash, or video/audio, you should probably give me a reason to whitelist the page. Sending and empty body tag, on the other hand, looks more like a rendering error than any kind of real content.
Don't bother replying with the usual nonsense assertions that "everybody has js", variations of "js is mandatory/expected", or that not running js in stupid/luddite. Sorry, with pages asking for js from 10-20 hosts and the current drama about network security, js is whitelist only. So give me a reason if you want to be added to that whitelist. This means actual content, not "I'm too lazy to statically render a copy on the server".
- coffeemug 12y ago> js is whitelist only You're not representative of the majority of online users. Not even close, by an enormous margin (95% of people don't know what JavaScript is, let alone how to disable it; out of the remaining 5% that do know, 4.999% don't care). Given that you're in an extreme minority and wield no power in the marketplace, could you give them a reason as to why they should dedicate development time to making this use case work?
- seanmcdirmid 12y agoThat makes me wonder: what is Lynx's market share these days?
- pdkl95 12y agoAhh, the downvotes, as expected. > 95% of people don't know what Javascript is Indeed. So you take every opportunity to exploit that ignorance, instead of educating them that there might be risks associated with running unknown code? This is a perfect example of one of the larger problems in the tech industry. Your product could be something that helps them, despite their ignorance of the alphabet soup of technologies. Instead, you choose to make something that requires the client to take risks. Was there some technical reason this was necessary? No. Was here some huge benefit to speed or availability that wasn't available with other technologies? No. The benefit was personal convenience ("development time"). The next time you see someone annoyed at technology they don't understand, remember that YOU (and people like you) were the source of that frustration. //i'm sure this will be downvoted as well, given how selfishly narrow-minded this crowd can be at times
- dburles 12y agoThis is something that's on the roadmap, though currently there is an unofficial package available.
- pdkl95 12y agoThank you - I will have to give the project another look once that feature is implemented in its final form.
- BtM909 12y agoYou're completely right. Although I think meteor is eating its own dogfood ;) Normally you would use meteor for your webapplication and only render the dynamic parts with meteor instead of the entire page.
- phpnode 12y agoYour sense of entitlement is simply staggering. Why do you assume that your attention is so valuable that developers should go out of their way to cater specifically to you? The number of people who disable JS is statistically insignificant. You have chosen to break your web experience, you have no one to blame but yourself.
- arbesfeld 12y agotry https://www.meteor.com/blog/2014/08/26/meteor-090-new-packaging-system?_escaped_fragment_= https://www.meteor.com/blog/2014/08/26/meteor-090-new-packag...