A missed opportunity to not have all of these examples inline. The page/blog-post would be so much more convincing if it utilized all of these HTML replacements instead (or in addition) to linking to codepen.
Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
111–120 of 296 posts
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is no longer true! You can do it in CSS with a combination of `@starting-style` and `transition-behavior: allow-discrete`. [1] Another gotcha you'll run into is animating the height. A couple other new features (`interpolate-size: allow-keywords` and `::details-content`) will let you get around that. [2] Modern CSS is awesome. [1] https://developer.chrome.com/blog/entry-exit-animations [2] https://nerdy.dev/open…
You say awesome, I say layers upon layers of opaque incantations I have to remember. Thank god for LLMs.
And how might you do this in Javascript?
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#113The details / summary thing absolutely kills me. There’s basically nothing you can’t do with them. Hiding and replacing markers is easy. But every component library just pretends they don’t exist. It even saves you the effort of all the aria control and expanded tags: these tags don’t need them.
> The details / summary thing absolutely kills me. There’s basically nothing you can’t do with them. Animating the details element is tricky. By the spec, browsers don’t natively support transitions between display: none and display: block.
> browsers don’t natively support transitions between display: none and display: block.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#114HTML and JavaScript serve distinct purposes, making better or worse comparisons logically flawed. Complex/interactive web apps requires JavaScript, period. Attempting to build sophisticated apps solely through HTML (looking at you HTMLX) eventually hits a functional ceiling.
I dont think anyone is arguing Google Earth should be pure HTML. But it is equally false you cant do Gmail with HTML only. There are things that HTML could do, and should be doing, that is not done or not yet possible simply due to hype and trend from browser vendors. We could continue to polish HTML + sprinkle of Javascript to its absolute maximum before hitting JS Apps. Right now this is far from the case.
Gmail used to provide an HTML version. It got removed only recently
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#115Does it bother anyone else that it links to Codepen instead of just putting them on the page? Like I get this is a blog system but it still feels odd, especially for a "use this plain HTML"-style post...
Bothered me greatly. Should have done on-page AND a link to codepen for you to play with
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#116It feels like some variation of this post gets submitted here every week.
That’s a bit of evergreen topic. “stop bloating web with js” comes up fairly often and there are those people who think they found a solution and everyone should start using whatever they imagine is “best for everyone”.
In my opinion most of those people struggle with whatever they encountered in ecosystem and just want to find a way that fits them - while also trying to make others do the same.
*“You didn’t want to make things perfect. You just hated things the way they are.”*
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#117HTML and JavaScript serve distinct purposes, making better or worse comparisons logically flawed. Complex/interactive web apps requires JavaScript, period. Attempting to build sophisticated apps solely through HTML (looking at you HTMLX) eventually hits a functional ceiling.
Depends on how complex it is meant to be. Just like many wordpress sites that could easily have been static websites, many javascript heavy sites could have easily just have been using htmlx. If your need really , goes beyond what htmx offers, then you may need Javascript. But in my experience people tend to use the tools they know for their job, not the tools that would be best suited.
FYI, it's easy to cache the html output of a WordPress site, resulting in essentially a static site with graphical admin, page builder, and all the other bells and whistles.
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#118The details / summary thing absolutely kills me. There’s basically nothing you can’t do with them. Hiding and replacing markers is easy. But every component library just pretends they don’t exist. It even saves you the effort of all the aria control and expanded tags: these tags don’t need them.
> The details / summary thing absolutely kills me. There’s basically nothing you can’t do with them. Animating the details element is tricky. By the spec, browsers don’t natively support transitions between display: none and display: block.
Does it need animating ?
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is no longer true! You can do it in CSS with a combination of `@starting-style` and `transition-behavior: allow-discrete`. [1] Another gotcha you'll run into is animating the height. A couple other new features (`interpolate-size: allow-keywords` and `::details-content`) will let you get around that. [2] Modern CSS is awesome. [1] https://developer.chrome.com/blog/entry-exit-animations [2] https://nerdy.dev/open…
I can't see how a bunch of esoteric incantations are better than just some straight-forward easy to understand and follow JavaScript.
1. CSS is declarative, so it avoid subtle bugs
2. CSS integrates better with HTML, as it has selectors to automatically bind to elements (yes there custom elements for JS)
Re: Replacing JavaScript with Just HTML
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
@starting-style Has less than 90% browser support making it a non-starter for the time being at least.
It'll just degrade gracefully into not animating the element's entry, so unless the animation is somehow crucial you should still be fine to use it. If you really need to detect whether it's supported there are hacky methods: https://www.bram.us/2024/07/11/feature-detect-css-starting-s...
I agree, but must also observe that I have never met a designer who was willing to admit without a knock-down drag-out fight that any animation they put in was not somehow crucial.