You might also not need CSS.
Doesn't mean you should bruteforce everything with just one tech. CSS is hard to maintain.
You might not need JavaScript
41–50 of 254 posts
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari is the new IE6, stop supporting it and let it die. It will not get any better anyway. If most of your users are on iOS, then make an app for them, it's what Apple also want you to do...
I have no idea why people use Chrome. Chrome/Google has terrible/no support of many browser layout & interaction features, such as CSS Regions & scroll snap points. Also, Safari is just a much better browser than Chrome. We need to make sure people stop using Chrome and move to the default browser in their environment - Safari & Edge. If you support the default browser, then you're going to be fine.
> default browser
Hi, I'm Linux.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#43It's sad that this site uses SCSS for displaying the rules, I'm using it in production and fully understand it, but it's needlessly abstracting the rules for the sake of a few extra words in each declaration. That aside, these are some pretty cool examples. Are there ways of doing this with CSS which doesn't screw with my browser back button?
There's a "view compiled" button that turns up if you hover the SCSS in codepen. I got through half the doc before discovering it though. I was very surprised to see the ampersand, since I was pretty sure CSS didn't have anything like that.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#44Does anyone else feel that a site called "You Might Not Need Javascript", probably shouldn't use Javascript?
Depends on what it uses it for. It says you "might not" need it, not that you won't need it.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#45These don't work in Safari 10:
- The modal dialog example
- Color picker
- Form validation
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#46Since half the examples do not work on Safari, I believe the title is a bit misleading.
Safari is the new IE6, stop supporting it and let it die. It will not get any better anyway. If most of your users are on iOS, then make an app for them, it's what Apple also want you to do...
Websites and browsing it self look and feel smoother in Safari compared to Google Chrome. Font rendering in Safari feel like font rendering in the rest of macOS. Not always but sometimes the same website has proper fonts in Safari but looks awkward in Chrome for some reason, I dunno why. Safari has proper GUI (especially settings) that feels at home in macOS instead of some weird web-based settings. Safari uses so much less power for the same usage compared to Chrome.
It's just my anecdotal view, but I believe that Chrome might be better for developers, but websites are made for the users, not the developers, and Safari is far superior on that front.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#47Another point of view: an exceptional article by Jenn Schiffer "A Call For Web Developers To Deprecate Their CSS" https://medium.com/cool-code-pal/a-call-for-web-developers-t... - HN Submit here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12691081
Surely that's a parody. If it's not...
As a rule of thumb: if it's written by Jenn Schiffer, it's probably satire.
Also, she called CSS "California Style Sheets" and called JS DOM manipulation "Node code".
Also, the header was obviously done in MS Paint.
Also, it's Jenn Schiffer.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#48It's sad that this site uses SCSS for displaying the rules, I'm using it in production and fully understand it, but it's needlessly abstracting the rules for the sake of a few extra words in each declaration. That aside, these are some pretty cool examples. Are there ways of doing this with CSS which doesn't screw with my browser back button?
I half agree with you, but one of the real benefits that SASS gives you here is making dependencies more obvious. A named variable like `$slider-height` is much clearer than a random number like `50px`. Yeah, you could put a comment next to every constant in the CSS, but I don't think that's clearer than the SASS alternative.
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#49Neat stuff. One small issue: the lightbox re-opens when I'm using the back button on my mouse (using Chrome), not sure if that's fixable or not?
Re: You might not need JavaScript
#50A few days ago a saw a talk about CSS animations with RxJS [0] and the gist about CSS only stuff was something like: "Yes, you can do much with CSS only, but it gets ugly fast." Often you're better of to do a mix of both, because some things that are very complicated in CSS are two-liners in JavaScript. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTCukb6Zn3g
> ...because some things that are very complicated in CSS are two-liners in JavaScript
And vice-versa, in modern browsers! Best to have both in your toolbox, definitely.