Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I'm betting on HTML

catskull.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 458 posts

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#431

Post by fennecfoxy »

p-e-w wrote: post #26

HTML is the solution to walled-garden lock-in? What? Those walled gardens already use HTML, including some of the semantic elements mentioned (plus ARIA semantic attributes, which are much more sophisticated). > ChatGPT-like interfaces are likely the future of human data access. And the whole point of artificial intelligence systems is that they don't require specialized "machine-readable" annotations in order to pro…

Completely agree with you. The magic of LLMs is being able to chuck it an unstructured mess of data and have it parse and interpret this data in some semblance of the way that a hooman would.

LLMs will only get smarter, and we can only guess what comes after the transformer model anyway. LLMs atm have the very obvious problem of appearing smart but not quite getting all the way there; I think this is pretty much down to it simply trying to predict the next token at its core. Perhaps we'll see something smarter when figure out that an LLM should only be used for output of semantic natural language and not ideation/conceptualisation (which should be handled by a separate model that deals in abstract concepts).

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#432

Post by beej71 »

andai wrote: post #100
beej71 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a middle ground here where we're building good-looking web pages with a sub-10 MB weight. Unfortunately, it makes no business sense to do so.

Sub 10MB? That's a whole YouTube video!

My home page, which admittedly doesn't contain much, is 11 KB. :)

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#433

Post by infogulch »

guggle wrote: post #426
infogulch wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who knows if it will be maintainable or not. Can you articulate why the php3 projects became unmaintainable?

I almost have ptsd from these dark days, I won’t go into details ;-) but there’s plenty of literature about separation of concerns. Having the templates doing the data access takes me back 20 years ago, but I can see why this idea comes back in a web component era.

Check out: https://htmx.org/essays/locality-of-behaviour/

The proposal is that Locality of Behavior > Separation of Concerns. Maybe its true! We'll see. :)

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#434

Post by spothedog1 »

tomlue wrote: post #341
jerf wrote: post #332

Article's first sentence: "With the advent of large language model-based artificial intelligence, semantic HTML is more important now than ever." I think the sentence "With the advent of large language model-based artificial intelligence, semantic HTML is less important now than ever." is far more defensible. The semantic web has failed and what replaced it was Google spending a crap ton of money writing a variety of…

agree so much. Projects that aim to build a data resource and then let AI use that resource are missing the point. The AI is the data resource. Some projects claim that knowledge graphs or other data assets can help the AI retrieve 'true' knowledge. Personally, I believe that the better approach is to develop methods that allow AIs to create their own data assets, the weights in their networks is one of those assets.…

what projects are trying to use knowledge graphs to retrieve truth? i've been playing around with that approach. how do you encode your own "truth" that may be different from anothers?

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#435

Post by cratermoon »

lmm wrote: post #425
cratermoon wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can create CSS to style the two tags accordingly, and in within my own work I can make them mean different things to the tools I use to create and manage html.

Sure. But you could always do that for any tags, regardless of - even in opposition to - their official semantics.

There are only two hard problems in programming: cache invalidation and naming. When programmers give something a name inconsistent with it's behavior, it's going to cause a problem.

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#436

Post by berkes »

JyB wrote: post #363
berkes wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on learning HTML Anecdote. Was recently freelancing at a web-agency. They build complex web-apps. Lot's of senior and experienced web-devs there: react, mui, typescript, tailwind, and a large host of backend frameworks under the belt. But when I built a quick PoC using ` ` a few lines of JS and some of the elements used in the article (meter, dialog, details) they were flabbergasted. This was a whole team of experi…

I mean. Doesn't it always boils down to supporting all "old/different browsers" hence why all web-agencies have to use all those JS libraries that seamlessly abstract it all?

Sometimes.

But do you really need to support a browser that less than half a percent uses? And isn't the fallback that HTML offers out of the box good enough then?

Sure, there are those rare cases where you build an appointment system for a hospital and where laws (rightfully!) dictate that the date picker must be both accessible and working on anything from IE6 to the browser on the first Wii.

But your average 99.99% of the sites?

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#437

Post by berkes »

johnnyworker wrote: post #257
berkes wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> simple element can't be used properly, I have no hope for all the others. The first solution that comes to mind, is stricter validation. Where the browser would just refuse to render a properly unless it's structure is correct. But we had that. Anything before HTML4 really. And it sucked even more. So maybe browser dev-tooling that throws warning or errors when devs are Doing It Wrong?

Give me an incentive to use it. If it looks exactly the same and behaves exactly the same, "div" is half the characters of "footer" so it wins. Personally, the argument that search engines will do nice things with semantic HTML didn't convince me back then, and I don't even see it brought up today, because search, like fish, stinks from the head, and we stopped pretending otherwise. So that leaves accessibility. Is t…

Maybe invest in an editor that helps you write ooter> after typing f in the correct place. If amount of characters truly is your reason to avoid semantic markup.

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#438

Post by berkes »

jcpst wrote: post #268
berkes wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> simple element can't be used properly, I have no hope for all the others. The first solution that comes to mind, is stricter validation. Where the browser would just refuse to render a properly unless it's structure is correct. But we had that. Anything before HTML4 really. And it sucked even more. So maybe browser dev-tooling that throws warning or errors when devs are Doing It Wrong?

I would love to just flip a switch in the browser dev tools and see html validation errors.

Me too. And I'd love to see it go beyond actual errors and suggest improvements like "a footer should typically only be inside a ..." And such.

Re: I'm betting on HTML

#440

Post by Alifatisk »

bingemaker wrote: post #427
Alifatisk wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> rendering happens on a canvas flutter run --web-renderer=html

Glad to know that this exists!

Yeah, there is even more fun arguments like "--enable-impeller" to massively improve the rendering performance!
Post reply on HN