My stack is HTML+CSS • Hacker News Board

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#31

Post by dceddia » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

Tomte wrote: post #24

dceddia wrote: post #16

While I really like the idea of serving raw HTML and CSS, I think that on the authoring side, a static site generator that ingests Markdown and generates HTML is a more practical way to go. I think writing raw HTML can work fine for small pages, and arguably it can be better than Markdown for pages with a lot of design elements, like landing pages. But for the typical blog post, or especially if the blog post has cod…

There are lots of different MD flavours, though. And even with Pandoc extensions you cannot really have an image inside with and alt text and title text.

Yep there are definitely some differences, especially once you start to go off the beaten path by including HTML in the Markdown, or using whatever flavor of template language the SSG provides.

I've got some older posts that use Jekyll's {% highlight %} directive, and I know that won't work if/when I change SSGs, but to me that's a small price to pay for not having to author those in raw HTML! :)

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#32

Post by ehutch79 » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

I'm very glad the author actually said this:

``` You don’t need Wordpress, or Hugo to put a blog online, or Angular, React or Next.js to put a web page online. Raw HTML and CSS do the job.

That being said, you’ll need to pick up some tooling or framework if you want to build a web app or add more interactivity or customization to your web pages. ```

So often people forget not everything sitting on the web has the same needs. saying 'you don't need a framework' ignores that, maybe i do infact need one, because otherwise i'd have to write it myself.

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#33

Post by ehutch79 » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:44 PM UTC

greggturkington wrote: post #25

Writing HTML and CSS by hand?! Those are just the output. OOTB Wordpress didn't have a perfect Lighthouse score, so it's worthless? > I didn’t need 99% of its features anyway Oh, then it was already a terrible fit. So why are you advising people on how to replace Wordpress?

For a blog page, especially something as simple as what's linked to, coding html and css by hand is very simple.

It's a blog, not a full blown app.

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#34

Post by cookingoils » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:45 PM UTC

A much better post on the same topic: http://john.ankarstrom.se/html/

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#35

Post by scook » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:45 PM UTC

Those poor Lighthouse scores are what you get when you put no work into refining your site's performance. This is especially true for an out-of-the-box Wordpress implementation. I have a React project with 100s across the board, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend a React implementation if high performance is key.

This doesn't even touch upon the topic of good developer performance, which is just as important as a set of Lighthouse scores. It's far easier to jump into an app with established build tools and documentation than it is to wade through a block of static HTML. Though if you're the only one working in your zen garden, have at it.

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#36

Post by davidwparker » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:48 PM UTC

I use Rails. I use Svelte. I do SSR and CSR. I have dynamic content (not a static blog).

My light house scores are ~95, 100, 100, 100.

It can be done, you just have to be smart about how you do things.

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#37

Post by greggturkington » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:48 PM UTC

ehutch79 wrote: post #33

greggturkington wrote: post #25

Writing HTML and CSS by hand?! Those are just the output. OOTB Wordpress didn't have a perfect Lighthouse score, so it's worthless? > I didn’t need 99% of its features anyway Oh, then it was already a terrible fit. So why are you advising people on how to replace Wordpress?

For a blog page, especially something as simple as what's linked to, coding html and css by hand is very simple. It's a blog, not a full blown app.

Yep, if you wanted you could re-write the same HTML and CSS by hand for every page instead of using templates. Is this a revelation?

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#38

Post by kodt » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:50 PM UTC

protonimitate wrote: post #12

I swear this same exact post gets re-dressed and upvoted weekly. Is there anything worth discussing here? The entire thesis of the post is "my blog is maintenance free". Ok, and? Is blog maintenance really a noteworthy topic? How many times can blogs rephrase "use the right tool for the job"?

Gotta get people to read your blog somehow.

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#39

Post by henlo » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

Plain HTML+CSS is really good nowadays. You can for example lazy load images with `loading="lazy"` attribute. You don't need JS anymore just to lazy load images. You can use plain CSS for simple interaction like opening and closing menu, toggling pricing plan, etc.

If you're curious with what you can build with plain HTML+CSS, check out my side project[0]. It's a collection of free landing page templates in plain HTML+CSS (no JS). No frameworks, no preprocessors.

[0] Uisual: https://uisual.com

Re: My stack is HTML+CSS

#40

Post by unabst » Thu, Jan 07, 2021, 5:54 PM UTC

I feel like there should be some better way to recognize and promote solutions that are future proof. Like transpilers and site generators that only produce vanilla code for deployment. Because it wouldn't matter how dated the tool is. Sticking to vanilla only is not the only option.

But I guess there could still be vulnerabilities in HTML that may need to be addressed? Like cross domain or cookie security...

But then again, same for a vanilla stack.

It definitely seems like maximum future-proofness should be more of a thing.