Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The browser is the bitch. Out of control, bloated, willingly so, in interaction with layers of scripting on both sides. The server and client are bait. There should be a serious effort to tackle the world of academics and their use of analog tools for digital publishing. Nothing is better mined and searched(for any entity not meta-rapers that "employ" slave coders as battery-chickens) as text. There should be a tende…
My stack is HTML+CSS
191–194 of 194 posts
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The browser is the bitch. Out of control, bloated, willingly so, in interaction with layers of scripting on both sides. The server and client are bait. There should be a serious effort to tackle the world of academics and their use of analog tools for digital publishing. Nothing is better mined and searched(for any entity not meta-rapers that "employ" slave coders as battery-chickens) as text. There should be a tende…
Re: My stack is HTML+CSS
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
A couple of years back, I helped move Fastmail’s blog from a home-grown thing from the mid-2000s that used Markdown.pl, to Ghost. It was nowhere near trivial. Line break behaviour changed, handling of indentation changed, treatment of raw HTML and Markdown characters within HTML tags changed… I fixed everything I noticed, but there was a lot of incompatibility, and old posts would have looked uniformly bad without so…
I've been through similar pains myself, but not in the last five years: there's been plenty of tooling to strict-format all content prior to starting any conversion, and plenty of tooling to convert from one flavour of markdown to another (although, mind you, sometimes that means converting away from markdown first, then converting that back to your new flavour).