231–240 of 333 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason is that trolls like to post links to shock sites or a google search for something terrible. Even worse, you could get rickrolled.
Some day we will have native browser support for the full URL showing in the status field.
https://twitter.com/rafalpast/status/1316836397903474688?s=2...
Anyone here absolutely godsmacked that this is the top news on HN? The hell happened? Did I get cryogenically frozen and just woke up?
So to sum what I'm reading, it's a neat little demonstration of the :target pseudoclass. But: - No, the entire website isn't a single HTML file (it's also images and a CSS file) - So no, you can't download a single file and have it work offline - And no, this won't work well with screenreaders and other non-standard clients - And no, this doesn't scale well to larger sites - And no, this won't be indexed well by sear…
1. You can embed CSS easily, and images using data: URIs...
2. ... so you can download the whole thing as a single and work offline.²
3. Non-standard clients are not my problem, file under “you can't please everyone, especially those who chose to be difficult to please!”. Accessibility is a concern though, I'd need to look into that before using such techniques without a reliable fallback.
4. This isn't practical for sites/pages needing large resources like high-res images, or that are large generally¹, but not all sites/pages need large resources or are large in general.
5. Not everything needs to be indexed well by search engines, I have things out there that are only relevant to those I refer to them, though I agree this could be a significant issue for many.
6. True. Though that breaks your second point, so you need to choose.
----
[1] you wouldn't want wikipedia done this way!
[2] also with external resources almost all browsers will happily save then when you do file|save, and to be pedantic the description given is “in a single html file” not “in a single file”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with PDF's has always been the layman can't create them without some expensive Adobe program.
macOS hasn’t had this problem in 20 years.
Also worth noting that the PDF preview on the Mac has very nice simple editing capabilities to combine pages, delete pages, crop etc.
So to sum what I'm reading, it's a neat little demonstration of the :target pseudoclass. But: - No, the entire website isn't a single HTML file (it's also images and a CSS file) - So no, you can't download a single file and have it work offline - And no, this won't work well with screenreaders and other non-standard clients - And no, this doesn't scale well to larger sites - And no, this won't be indexed well by sear…
This is all classic and supported HTML, so those should work perfectly for this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
May I ask how to create a Mathematics Stack Exchange clone without JS?
What part of a Mathematics Stack Exchange clone would require JS?
This is great. I just wish this clumsy wording was a bit tighter: > the whole website is contained within a single HTML file. Because, it's not. An HTML file, a CSS file, and some PNGs. What's interesting is there is no JavaScript.
Then in practice the issue becomes a bloated file that isn't able to reuse internal components, at least not without introducing a layer of complexity such as a scripting language and browser APIs to go with it.
Perhaps if HTML had been designed with more component re-usability in mind, the landscape of the internet would look very different today. Then again, what sense would there be in having a single HTML file for a site like Wikipedia or Altavista? And imagining the web evolving without a scripting language would be naive.
Single file websites that could be served up on blob or network storage certainly appeal to me, especially today.