I didnt see html, just ruby bindings. Anyone can make easy bindinds on server but it costs flexibility on components, imagine for deep nested levels customized components and syncing.
Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
441–450 of 573 posts
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
Check out Gaff Tape as a replacement for the duct-tape at home use-case. And for actual ducts you'll want to use foil-tape because temperature changes wreck the adhesion of duct-tape, then the moisture leaks into the walls/ceiling which is $$$$ bad.
> And for actual ducts you'll want to use foil-tape because temperature changes wreck the adhesion of duct-tape, then the moisture leaks into the walls/ceiling which is $$$$ bad. This strongly depends on the type of duct. Flex ducts that are a plastic skin over a wire coil don't work so well with aluminum tape.
Oh, yes. I'm referring to rigid steel/tin works only.
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
>65+ above white wise men snobbery Nice! Casual ageism and racism mixed into one post.
Conventional wisdom is discrimination against privileged groups such as white men is less offensive because they’ve endured so much less of it. On one hand, it’s true. It’s part of white privilege which is tangible. On the other hand, however less often people in a privileged class are realistically impacted by discrimination, it’s still > 0.0%. Since it usually costs nothing more to include everyone it seems useful.…
White privilege doesn't exist and is not "tangible". It is just some academic theory which was accepted with no evidence and with no common sense. "Privilege" is a combination of many factors so even isolating it to skin colour as if it sums up everything about a person is just plain stupid. Not to mention that it all comes out of some American internal issue which doesn't apply to many other "whites" around the world. Even the concept of white is different in different parts of the world. Can American leaves us alone with this idiocy and keep it to themselves?
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#444As others have noted, seems reasonably similar to LiveView, Livewire and Blazor. I’m somewhat bullish on these approaches - server side rendered monoliths (Rails, Django, etc.) are SO productive, at least for the first few years of development, but lack of interactivity is a big issue, and this solves it well. However, another big issue is the dominance of mobile. More and more, you’ve got 2-3 frontends (web and cros…
For mobile, they used Turbolinks to release and maintain ios and android basecamp apps based on minimal os-specific chrome code and back-end web-based "pages".
Really, an incredible bang for the buck.
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
> RESTful APIs serving up JSON works for all 3, as does GraphQL (not a fan, but many are). This however is totally web-specific HTML is a machine-readable format, like XML and JSON. Have your back end represent a given resource as microformatted-semantic markup, send it gzipped over the wire, and you've got the data exchange you need, even if your mobile app isn't already dressed-up webview.
Are you still referring to dedicated API routes, or are you talking about annotating your UI to the point where it can serve as the API as well? I remember the latter being the vision behind things like RDFa, but those approaches never took off, for a variety of reasons.
Either. Or both. :)
Generally the projects I've felt best about have two features:
1) The API knows how to represent resources across multiple media types, usually including at least markup and JSON.
2) UI is well-annotated enough that developers and machines find it easy to orient themselves and find data.
But you're quite right that this isn't common. I have my own guesses on the reasons why. My observation's been that the workflow and stakeholder decision making process on the UI side places semantic annotation pretty low on the priority side; most places you're lucky if you can get a style guide and visual UI system adopted. And there has to be cooperation and buy-in at that level in order for there to be much incentive to engineer and use a model/API-level way of systematic representing entities as HTML, which often won't happen.
And TBH it is extra effort.
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a "silly rule" that the web is not for application development. It's about the technology as such! An example what I mean: One can use a stone to put nails into a wall. But a hammer is clearly the better tool for that task.
But what about users who actually prefer some web applications, like the user you responded to? To them, the web application is the hammer. I mean really who gets to decide which is better besides the user?
For the user the underlying tech should be transparent. Users just want applications with common "look & feel". How that's done doesn't mater to them in the end.
That's the lesson we've learned by now in the mobile space.
But for the developers of those applications the how makes a big difference: Building apps with the right "look & feel" is much easier when using a tech stack that was purposely created for exactly that mater - instead of hacking something into existence by misusing some technology that was created in the first place to serve completely different needs. Because of this fact people mostly stopped trying to build "HTML apps" on mobile.
The remaining question is why this wisdom isn't taken to its last consequence. Which is, of course, that it also applies exactly the same to desktop applications!
That's actually the last step on our journey before going full circle. As most other comments point out we're straight on the way to "the past", "what's old is new again". What I'm pointing out is that what we're seeing here is just an intermediate step before the full realization of that fact.
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#447Earlier quoted context omitted.
Best of luck getting paying users to install each individual desktop application, as opposed to installing a browser and then navigating to multiple applications without any additional desktop/native work. I guess there might be space for something like Steam, but for business apps, but I just don't see it. The argument "This isn't what the web was made for" is kind of a cowpath argument. The web is being used to (am…
Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me. Consider this from the developer's point of view, and every single developer will tell you they'd rather make Javascript and some HTML rather than GTK application in C, especially when it'll work on every platform except maybe Plan 9.
As a developer I'm saying I would prefer QML to HTML anytime. :-D
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just wanted to point out that it is called duct tape, just to avoid misunderstandings since i had a similiar spelling error as a non-native speaker :)
it's funny how culture shapes our designations of the same thing. In (specially us) english it's duct tape as the product is primarily known for installation work, and often referred to as "duck tape" for it's well known brand, whereas in (german speaking) europe we also employ an English word for it, but call it "gaffer tape", for it's usage by light operators in the event business (so called gaffers)
I don’t think gaffer’s tape and duct tape are the same thing. Gaffer’s tape needs to be easily removable, which duct tape generally is not.
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#449They’re (poorly) trying to emulate Blazor Server.
Re: Hotwire: HTML over the Wire
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doing an "apt install", or just clicking install in some GUI, isn't such a big deal as you're pretending. I've heard of systems where it's a bit more fuss. But that's a problem with their software distribution model respectively.
> Doing an "apt install", or just clicking install in some GUI, isn't such a big deal as you're pretending. To you. Software devs are rarely the targets of the products they build. Also, I am not pretending. It was my job for several years.
I can just repeat: That's a problem with the specific manner of software distribution on some operating systems, and not a general argument in favor of web-apps.