Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Whosfiring

whosfiring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 187 posts

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#121

Post by bryanrasmussen »

codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

Although I will agree this is bad, I am going to probably use a bunch of non-essential stuff to build a personal project because I need to be able to point to having used these technologies. Sometimes bad technologies get used for social reasons.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#122

Post by Flimm »

tokenizerrr wrote: post #65
codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

> The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. It's probably because you opted to disable one of the essential web technologies in your browser. Plenty of websites are written as SPAs nowadays. This is like complaining that pages are black on white because you disabled CSS. Or that you can't see websites at all…

Complaining that pages are black because you disabled CSS is a legitimate complaint. Plenty of people need to modify or disable or ignore CSS for accessibility reasons.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#123

Post by kejaed »

Swizec wrote: post #53
codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

I'm someone who builds a lot of SPAs for things that really don't need to be SPAs. The ability to host on gh-pages and to not implement a backend at all seals the deal for me. That said, I try to load a static version of the compiled result as part of the skeleton HTML. Even if it gets overwritten by the SPA afterwards, it makes things look faster.

Would you mind sharing any frameworks you use, specifically wrt ones that work well when hosting on gh-pages? Thanks.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#124

Post by codedokode »

briandear wrote: post #96
codedokode wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pages load faster with JS disabled, show less advertisement and no popups. Browser processes take less memory. Social network tracking scripts (usually disguised as share buttons) do not work. Annoying fixed headers, footers and sidebar usually don't work without JS too. I got used to this comfortable way of browsing the web and seeing more sites that don't work without JS doesn't make me happy.

I think the disconnect is that people have conflated websites with web applications. I fully expect an application to use JS because essentially you're providing (or attempting to provide) desktop-analogous functionality in the browser. However a "website" has the purpose of 'displaying information' -- essentially some form of text + images akin to a newspaper page. In those cases JavaScript is an enhancement but oug…

You are right. There are web applications (like Google Docs) and simple collections of web pages (a typical Wordpress blog). I am not against JS or SPA architecture generally but I am against using complicated solutions for simple problems. Using rich frontend application to display just a list of links is obviously over-engineering.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#125

Post by codedokode »

tokenizerrr wrote: post #65
codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

> The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. It's probably because you opted to disable one of the essential web technologies in your browser. Plenty of websites are written as SPAs nowadays. This is like complaining that pages are black on white because you disabled CSS. Or that you can't see websites at all…

Requiring JS support to display a list of links is like requiring a user to download an application to view the site. No sane person would do this, right? Oh wait...

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#126

Post by adrianN »

Blahah wrote: post #97
tambourine_man wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an equivalent analogy. Disabling JS displays nothing at all , while changing text and background color is a progressive enhancement. Content should still be accessible without JavaScript, even if, perhaps, in a less convenient way, i.e., every click reloads the entire page

Why? Every browser has JS, and it's a core web technology.

Does every screen reader have Javascript?

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#127

Post by tambourine_man »

adim86 wrote: post #102
tambourine_man wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an equivalent analogy. Disabling JS displays nothing at all , while changing text and background color is a progressive enhancement. Content should still be accessible without JavaScript, even if, perhaps, in a less convenient way, i.e., every click reloads the entire page

But why? Who made the rule that websites should work without JS? Content being accessible without JS is best practice. I get it and it was very valuable a long time ago. It comes in handy sometimes today but for most of the internet accessing world, working without JS is not a requirement. I do not get why people ding products for not working when JS is not enabled.

> Who made the rule that websites should work without JS?

It's not an arbitrary rule, it's just that they always have.

That's the hole point of progressive enhancement, you don't start requiring some technology as soon as it reaches x% market share and ignore the remaining minority. You build on top and offer a better experience to those that can or want.

In the apps world, it's usual to draw a line on a set of minimum system requirements and expect that line to move forward as the years go by.

But this is the Web, being accessible should be a priority.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#129

Post by bdg »

codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

When provided this sort of feedback, filter it through the lens of business value instead.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#130

Post by silversmith »

tambourine_man wrote: post #91
tokenizerrr wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. It's probably because you opted to disable one of the essential web technologies in your browser. Plenty of websites are written as SPAs nowadays. This is like complaining that pages are black on white because you disabled CSS. Or that you can't see websites at all…

That's not an equivalent analogy. Disabling JS displays nothing at all , while changing text and background color is a progressive enhancement. Content should still be accessible without JavaScript, even if, perhaps, in a less convenient way, i.e., every click reloads the entire page

It's like saying a company should be present in each and every market. It might or might not make business sense to do that. Same with JS - it might or might not make sense to support non-js browsers, based on your target audience.
Post reply on HN