Live data from Hacker News

HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

lists.w3.org

171–177 of 177 posts

Re: HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

#171

These single-page apps are becoming pervasive but they are also fundamentally breaking the internet. Here are some common ways in which they are broken: 1. History is screwed up. You wanted a back button that took you back to the content you were looking at? Sucks to be you. The content you were looking at was dynamically loaded after ten different buttons you clicked, and now that the page is loaded fresh those butt…

I agree with you in principle that if apps don't meet 1, 2, 4 & 5 they shouldn't see light of day but I think your points are largely spurious or handled by any semi-competent dev. 1 & 2 are a basic feature of JS MVC frameworks. I get that some people still probably mess this up, but there's no excuse to do so at this point. 3. Irrelevant/FUD? No normal user 'saves' web-pages, unless it's something like a receipt, wh…

> 1 & 2 are a basic feature of JS MVC frameworks. I get that some people still probably mess this up, but there's no excuse to do so at this point.

I'm not sure what it would even mean for this to not be broken in a one-page app. If you're displaying more than one conceptually grouped set of content on one page, you're breaking the web's concept of a page: a page is one conceptually grouped set of content. JS MVC frameworks allow you to back and forward between "pages" within a page using the hashed href trick, but they can't keep your scroll location without rendering the page to determine layout, unless there's some magic I'm not aware of.

> 3. Irrelevant/FUD? No normal user 'saves' web-pages, unless it's something like a receipt, which any sane dev would make a separate html page and not part of the app.

I love when people tell me that nobody does what I do all the time. And it's not just me: a lot of people save pages for later reading, especially in academia.

> 4. is totally false as screen-readers support JavaScript.

Yes, screen readers support JavaScript, but JavaScript rarely supports screen readers. It's clear you've never actually attempted to browse the web using a screen reader.

> 5. is false/strawman as any half-sane SPA developer still authenticates using a regular back-end framework and I've no idea what 'If you app loads content from a server that isn't yours' has to do with single-page apps.

JavaScript security is a fucking joke. I'm not sure what you think authentication does when your JavaScript is running in the same namespace as all the other JavaScript in a page and malicious code needs simply to tell authenticated code what to do to spoof an identity. A server can do nothing to provide security when the requests from a browser are coming from an authenticated user (but are actually made by malicious JavaScript in the page).

Plenty of apps include advertisements from arbitrary sources, hence loading content from a server that isn't yours.

Re: HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

#172
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTML does not do templating, either.

I'm just going to leave this here: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/scripting.html#the-te...

That's really just an alias'd script tag. You are still using javascript to actually do the templating.

Re: HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

#173
Yes we have to make html and css more powerfull and dynamic and this will make browser similar no need of hacks for compatibility and there is no use of extra coding because when we make an app or make a website we use most of javascript plugins some time we dont need of extra features in the plugin so we have to modify those plugins that will make some extra hours

Re: HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

#174
Yes we have to make the html and css more dynamic for single page application because it will take less time and single handed coded by the developers. So in this time we have to use frameworks that have some additional features that we dont use in our website or application we use some of them which is really suit to our need and there are lots of browser having compatibility issues if html and css become more dynamic and independent the compatibility issue will be solve and we dont need for extra time for using plugins and make them for our needs.

Re: HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

#176

These single-page apps are becoming pervasive but they are also fundamentally breaking the internet. Here are some common ways in which they are broken: 1. History is screwed up. You wanted a back button that took you back to the content you were looking at? Sucks to be you. The content you were looking at was dynamically loaded after ten different buttons you clicked, and now that the page is loaded fresh those butt…

I totally agree. It's too bad a compromise. If you want Google to crawl your site it should be server-generated HTML. If you want apps, make actual desktop/mobile applications.

Re: HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without JavaScript

#177

Single page apps seem like a hack to make browser apps feel like they are closer to native apps. Because most SPAs have a set flow, it seems like we should be able to use prefetching to tell the browser what is most likely to happen next. For example, if you are on a list, then you can tell the browser to prefetch the details. What I feel like is missing from this equation is a nice transition between pages. How nice…

Chuckles IE used to support this with something called Inter-Page Transitions [1] - every time I saw it it made me double-take.

  
CONTENT="progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Slide(Duration=2.500,slidestyle='HIDE')" />

That said, I wouldn't go down that road again. Better pre-fetching hints are good and HTML is a good place for a fallback (HTTP 2.0 provides better ways of doing it if you have control of the server), but page transitions are something better left to CSS, to my mind.

[1]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms532847%28v=vs.85%...

Post reply on HN