HEAD – A guide to elements • Hacker News Board

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#21

Post by bcoates » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:09 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #11

> The above 2 meta tags must come first in the to consistently ensure proper document rendering. It looks like they don't follow their own advice:

Do what they say, not what they do!

maximum-scale has only three valid uses:

1. extreme values, like 5.0, if a browser misdetects that zooming that far is useful when it isn't (rare)

2. pure-app websites like maps or video games that have alternative scaling arrangements and browser pinch-zoom gets in the way.

3. there is no number three, and the thing you are thinking of is incorrect.

maximum-scale is an automatic usability and accessibility fail otherwise, you are bad and should be made to feel bad if you use it.

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#22

Post by berkut » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:10 PM UTC

munk-a wrote: post #16

The_rationalist wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially

was super nice in the old days when I worked with servers without subdomains for staging/testing, it made it pretty trivial to have domain.tld/website and domain.tld/testing/website ... granted, those were dark days and I'd never use that approach now, but it was appreciated.

Out of interest, what would you use instead these days?

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#23

Post by kizer » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:10 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #11

> The above 2 meta tags must come first in the to consistently ensure proper document rendering. It looks like they don't follow their own advice:

Isn't x-ua-compatible not needed or not respected anymore? I think this for some reason... maybe I read it somewhere or concluded so; can't recall, lol.

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#24

Post by kizer » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:11 PM UTC

bcoates wrote: post #21

saagarjha wrote: post #11

> The above 2 meta tags must come first in the to consistently ensure proper document rendering. It looks like they don't follow their own advice:

Do what they say, not what they do! maximum-scale has only three valid uses: 1. extreme values, like 5.0, if a browser misdetects that zooming that far is useful when it isn't (rare) 2. pure-app websites like maps or video games that have alternative scaling arrangements and browser pinch-zoom gets in the way. 3. there is no number three, and the thing you are thinking of is incorrect. maximum-scale is an automatic u…

If you limit it to 1.0 by default across the board, in particular, you mean, right?

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#25

Post by alexdumitru » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:12 PM UTC

>

Is Dreamweaver still a thing? I haven't heard of it in years, many years.

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#26

Post by kizer » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:13 PM UTC

kizer wrote: post #24

bcoates wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do what they say, not what they do! maximum-scale has only three valid uses: 1. extreme values, like 5.0, if a browser misdetects that zooming that far is useful when it isn't (rare) 2. pure-app websites like maps or video games that have alternative scaling arrangements and browser pinch-zoom gets in the way. 3. there is no number three, and the thing you are thinking of is incorrect. maximum-scale is an automatic u…

If you limit it to 1.0 by default across the board, in particular, you mean, right?

This is the thing that limit the zoom-out with a pinch in safari/scroll beyond the page and see the "surface" underneath I'm assuming correctly hopefully

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#27

Post by bcoates » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:15 PM UTC

kizer wrote: post #13

We need more single page references like this, IMO, for all sorts of random domains. Even something like a single-page reference for how Array.from works in JS, as an example. Even if it were standalone it could later be integrated into a broader reference work. In the meantime, a "arrayfrom.dev" page, although non-general, would fill a specific niche w/ a mnemonic URL (Array.from is just an example - no idea whether…

Is mdn not satisfactory for that? searching 'mdn array.from' brings up a nice one-pager on that and it works for almost any web/js documentation.

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#28

Post by dfsegoat » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:17 PM UTC

alexdumitru wrote: post #25

> Is Dreamweaver still a thing? I haven't heard of it in years, many years.

I last touched it in 2012 - but apparently, yes, yes it is:

https://helpx.adobe.com/dreamweaver/using/whats-new.html

Although, it looks like their cumulative 2019 updates are limited to the following headlines between the two:

1) added support for HTML tag highlighting inside PHP code

2) bootstrap CSS support.

... I was surprised to see it was still alive.

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#29

Post by munk-a » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:18 PM UTC

berkut wrote: post #22

munk-a wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

was super nice in the old days when I worked with servers without subdomains for staging/testing, it made it pretty trivial to have domain.tld/website and domain.tld/testing/website ... granted, those were dark days and I'd never use that approach now, but it was appreciated.

Out of interest, what would you use instead these days?

Oh, usually is still bound to the server root name, but in most cases an SPA or what-have-ye will be served off the base subdomain with client side routing hints - then everything can just be referenced using stripped down relative URLs.

Actually though, for the server-side processed stuff we are still using to make sure that /fancy/bespoke/url/style URLs doesn't try to grab assets from /fancy/bespoke/url/style/styles/main.css - I guess it's less that I don't use it and more that now-a-days I rarely set it to anything other than domainname since I'll just materialize a new subdomain if I need to do something fancy.

Re: HEAD – A guide to <head> elements

#30

Post by munk-a » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 10:20 PM UTC

kizer wrote: post #14

rolltiide wrote: post #7

Does anybody remember that funny thread where some dev here was saying "who calls it HTML5 anymore" as if everyone else was out of touch with stagnating irrelevant skills that would immediately throw red flags during a phone screen? It just gave me a chuckle thinking about it Thanks for the guide!

Uh... what do people call "it" now-a-days? Serious

Mostly HTML5 in my experience.

Less seriously, sometimes it's referred to as "Oh, whatever happened to XHTML 2.0, I was so looking forward to that, oh well guess we're using HTML5" but this is usually at conferences.