Has anyone tried to create something other than a simple blog, like an actual web product with with users, using only the HTML+CSS stack?
My stack is HTML+CSS
51–60 of 194 posts
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#52This is an inaccurate over-simplification. If you just use HTML and CSS, you can also have really bad Lighthouse scores. For example, vanilla ` ` will ship the same image to every device, regardless of viewport size. Vanilla ` ` doesn't enforce setting `width` and `height`, which makes your layouts shift. Slow-loading images and layout shifts are the very things that will downgrade the "100" score he's currently prou…
You might not be aware of the ‘ ’ HTML tag that only sends the correct size img to the user based on their browser size. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/HTML/Multimed...
Definitely. But notice he's not using the tag in this post for his image. "Just HTML+CSS" cannot possibly be connected to the 100 score conclusion (same for dismissing WordPress, which could have yielded that element as well.)
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#53Those 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 s…
The site still fails Lighthouse, including the test for "Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities." But wait, I thought it was just HTML and CSS!
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#54While 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.
Most near-trivial to rewrite to each other's format though, which means you can get any static generator to ingest your favourite flavour with only a one-time step possibly (but almost certainly not) required to teach it how to ingest a format that isn't a perfect match for what it expects.
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#55Has anyone tried to create something other than a simple blog, like an actual web product with with users, using only the HTML+CSS stack?
Yes. In the nineties.
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh boy, YouTube embeds! I went through checking the Lighthouse score on a few of my pages a while back, and the ones that had videos were performing pretty badly. It turned out that embedded YouTube videos were pulling down something like 1mb of JS, just to show the thumbnail , before the user even clicked Play. I ended up making a static thumbnail with a hover-over "play" icon that would replace itself with the real…
Twitter embeds are equally bad. Ended up remaking them to output static HTML + CSS to improve perf ( https://leerob.io/tweets ).
As a user, I hate twitter embeds. If I select text inside them, they redirect my user agent location. That's never what I want.
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#57Plain 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 HTM…
Not needing to write markup at the time of content generation even better than writing HTML, though. Use any of a million static site generators and get the benefit of writing what you want to write in the most efficient format for that, without needing to program the typesetting markup while you're writing.
HTML is in no way the best tool for write content. But it is the best tool to serve content in a browser.
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#58 My stack will outlive yours
"name": "My stack will outlive yours",
My stack will outlive yoursRe: My stack is HTML+CSS
#59My approach of theoretics goes in that direction, more or less accentuated on different goal settings. Your approach must work for you as for sheer efficiency. You will spend more time on relevant issues, if so desired, of producing meaningful content.
Now include hardware into the same philosophy, the long term into shelf live, a single programming language worked on by dedicated knowledgeable individuals ideally. You are on our side of things.
A page (web/print) should be written, locally, off-line, in the same editor of always, in open-source code, preferably the blob of compiled code at it's nucleus, if there is any neeeded also. Content should have a seven hundred year lifeline, readable, view-able in minimal software allowances. Then it cannot be said too often, hardware-software is in-extricable.
For all those that think phishing in the public domain for the soul of the crowds, well, that is fine, but nothing the matter. And be prepared for a frustrated life-time of scratching your itches.
Theodore Kackzinski, people who vouch for the "hundred year", robust hardware, for the fashion of the ages, they seem to be on the right side of history. That same observation de-obfuscates the evidenced in what is going on in AI, and statistics, mining data. ...when the data are repeats, high-level, junk, outright meaningless, no amount of AI or tweaking using computer power will assert anything but junk outcomes.
People scale badly, that makes for the most efficient workflow to be a-synchronous, for nuggets of which as an individual we have as a rule none, and few individuals very little, that sort of data merits a long life-line, that data need to be tailored for the above allowances as you point rightfully out.
You might be fake, or limited in your ambitions, but from what I read, I must concede you make sense before any back-ground check is at order.
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#60This is an inaccurate over-simplification. If you just use HTML and CSS, you can also have really bad Lighthouse scores. For example, vanilla ` ` will ship the same image to every device, regardless of viewport size. Vanilla ` ` doesn't enforce setting `width` and `height`, which makes your layouts shift. Slow-loading images and layout shifts are the very things that will downgrade the "100" score he's currently prou…