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

Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

weborigami.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 77 posts

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#11

Post by echoangle »

inanutshellus wrote: post #10
echoangle wrote: post #4

[flagged]

From your description I expected a pile of legalese, but in reading it... I don't see "passive-aggressive" I see simple etiquette guidelines that shouldn't have to be said, but... clearly do. Often users screaming "I won't use [your project] if you don't fix [my whim]!"** actually does get some traction. So saying explicitly in the readme that that is rude and won't be allowed seems ... healthy. Notably, because it's…

The best analogy for the feeling I got when reading this is visiting someone at his house and the first thing he says is „BTW, don’t take any of my stuff, that’s stealing!“. Sure, but can I take of my shoes first?

If it’s in a CodeOfConduct.md I get it but having it be more than half of the readme feels a bit weird.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#12

Post by mplewis »

echoangle wrote: post #4

[flagged]

Great – that is exactly how the author wants to be treated. They have set some clear boundaries about working with random internet people like us, and it’s our responsibility to respect those boundaries.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#13

Post by robrtsql »

inanutshellus wrote: post #10
echoangle wrote: post #4

[flagged]

From your description I expected a pile of legalese, but in reading it... I don't see "passive-aggressive" I see simple etiquette guidelines that shouldn't have to be said, but... clearly do. Often users screaming "I won't use [your project] if you don't fix [my whim]!"** actually does get some traction. So saying explicitly in the readme that that is rude and won't be allowed seems ... healthy. Notably, because it's…

It's totally reasonable, and is also the exact sort of guidelines I would want to establish if I were the maintainer of an open-source project.

However, I think it's amusing that the website lists all of these cool reasons why someone should use Web Origami, and then the repo more-or-less says "here's all of these rules you should abide by if you want to even CONSIDER using this project". One page is meant to draw users in, the other to fend them off.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#16

Post by hatsix »

echoangle wrote: post #11
inanutshellus wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From your description I expected a pile of legalese, but in reading it... I don't see "passive-aggressive" I see simple etiquette guidelines that shouldn't have to be said, but... clearly do. Often users screaming "I won't use [your project] if you don't fix [my whim]!"** actually does get some traction. So saying explicitly in the readme that that is rude and won't be allowed seems ... healthy. Notably, because it's…

The best analogy for the feeling I got when reading this is visiting someone at his house and the first thing he says is „BTW, don’t take any of my stuff, that’s stealing!“. Sure, but can I take of my shoes first? If it’s in a CodeOfConduct.md I get it but having it be more than half of the readme feels a bit weird.

Which is it? So problematic that you wouldn't use it even if it were exactly the tool you needed, or "a bit weird".

I agree, it's a bit weird. So is putting a lot of effort into a project that nobody is asking for and you'll give it away for free. There are many people in my life that are neurodivergent and some situations cost more than they are worth. I have had several projects I thought were good candidates for open source, but the idea of dealing with the "anonymous a-hole" has been a show-stopper for me. I appreciate that the authors of this project seem to have similar concerns, but have overcome them by creating a social contract. I believe that it's entire goal is to turn people away whose interactions may be too much for the maintainers. Good.

If reading those rules and abiding by them is too much for you, then just turn around and walk away. That's the intention and goal. They're doing you a favor, letting you know that your brand of weird is not compatible with their brand of weird. They don't have to make space for everyone in their little project, and there might not be space for you there, and that's OK.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#17

Post by turnsout »

Interesting, and I love Static Site Generators (SSGs), but as soon as you introduce branching and logic to the page creation, you've effectively ruled out non-programmers. So I don't know how it will achieve the stated goal of "a language for making websites where you can understand how they're made."

The audience you're left with (programmers) will bristle at the DSL and wonder why they don't just use "___" <-- fill in their favorite SSG.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#20

Post by optymizer »

soco wrote: post #19

And still supporting HTTP. I don't know about this, anyone can suggest a reason to use HTTP nowadays?

  * To serve content that can be accessed on networks using captive portals
  * To serve content on localhost while developing
  * To serve content on devices where setting up letsencrypt or other SSL is either too much of a hassle or not important
  * To stand up a quick HTTP server on hacked servers
Maybe others can come up with more examples
Post reply on HN