101–110 of 171 posts
It's not because of JS that semantic HTML and accessibility are neglected: it's because of inexperienced developers. If anything, modern libraries, frameworks and tooling empower developers to build modern UIs that are accessible. Of course, with power comes responsibility, but that's like blaming the car for speeding.
I often see people say “JS is unstable,you’re always rewriting your code for the latest and greatest framework” and I always wonder where do you work? If I told the people I report to I can’t deliver that for you because we’re rewriting the app, I’d be out of the door soon. The JS ecosystem is like any technology ecosystem, things change over time but you don’t have to chase the trends, be pragmatic about what you fo…
Usual arguments for "upgrading" are: * We can't hire specialists for older frameworks. * We can't generate positive hipe over older technologies. * New technologies are better, so we will deliver features faster. In reality, it's almost always resume-driven development.
This is what drives me crazy. I’ve been at my company for a couple decades. I want stability and long term health of the company.
The resume driven development isn’t even from the engineers, it’s from the leadership. An IT leader gets hired from the outside, starts a big project that will look good on the resume, then midway through the project, they are just far enough to try and call it a success and leverage it into a new position. Now we have a leadership change in the middle of a giant foundational shift of the infrastructure. The new leader comes in and does the same thing. I don’t see how a company can survive this long term. It creates such fragility. People like me, with little interest in job hopping, aren’t looking to resume build. I’m looking to have the company’s operations run smoothly so customers have a reliable service, so we retain them as customers… and for a little peace and stability myself. These resume building leaders make that difficult and seem to actively work against the long term health of the company. They aren’t interested in the next 10-20 years, they are only worried about their next job in 3-4 years, with no concern for the mess they leave behind.
I hope this is just a trend and it dies soon. The needless stress it has brought into my once simple life has been rather unpleasant.
Based on my experience, I think this is wrong. Node.js didn't open the web app gates to non-web devs (those devs more likely than not wouldn't even know JS), it was the other way round: it opened the backend gates to frontend devs, because suddenly they could use the language they know to run code in the server.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Usual arguments for "upgrading" are: * We can't hire specialists for older frameworks. * We can't generate positive hipe over older technologies. * New technologies are better, so we will deliver features faster. In reality, it's almost always resume-driven development.
It may be resume-driven, but that's the state of the world. If you fail to keep your team members and attract new ones as the team needs to grow, you are fighting a losing battle.
> The result? Broken back buttons. Image bloat. Inaccessible markup. URLs that don’t behave like URLs. Metadata that disappears. Content you can’t copy. Buttons you can’t keyboard to. Modals that trap you. Scroll positions that reset for no reason. Headlines that shift mid-read. Analytics that don’t match reality. Preview environments that lie. And pages that load… eventually. -- None of that is the fault of Javascri…
The problem is that getting those things right is 4x more difficult in a SPA app than a legacy, server rendered, app. - No native back and forward button implementation. Now you must listen to an API and emulate the legacy behaviour. - The concept of links, its also emulated via onClick events. This means that anything can be a link, so in many cases rows become links and their content is not really selectable as tex…
Links in Vue Router at least are just regular tags. Yes the framework handles navigation when clicking these, but nothing prevents anyone from wrapping anything they want in an tag even with no JS. You could make an entire table be clickable as a link if you wanted to, framework or not. "Legacy" HTML will render these just fine and browsers will make it a regular link, even though HTML validators will fail it.
Literally the first element anyone makes in frameworks will be a generic Button element that is simply a with some styling. People abuse divs as buttons with or without frameworks because again, nothing prevents you from making any arbitrary element in your DOM have an onclick handler and act as a button. Tabbing through can even work with the correct ARIA attributes, and can even be broken on regular plain s if abused hard enough.
I would seriously suggest people try out Vue or especially Svelte, they're about as simple as you can possibly get (especially Svelte 4) while giving you a lot of power and flexibility. I've worked with plenty of server-rendered apps in the past, and trust me, people would butcher things just as badly and easily there.
This. So much this. I have a website for my students, with various content they need for assigned projects. HTML and CSS. The webserver itself is a small, simple Java application that sends files requested by the browsers. KISS.
Looks like that article was AI generated by a SEO consultant. Ironically, if anything "broke" the web, it's ADs and SEO... Sorry, the article itself was really painful for me to read.
It's not obvious to me that this blog post was synthesized whole cloth from an LLM. On the other hand, in that same interview, the author encourages the use of LLMs for idea exploration, and it's entirely possible that this is what he did.
In fact, using an LLM in this way may itself may be an SEO trick, in the sense that he simply wanted to boost his search rank (inasmuch as it's still the case that longer articles are more highly ranked) by beefing up what would have otherwise been a very short article.
Although I agree that JS is being used incredibly irresponsibly, I also think this article is almost certainly AI-generated with minimal editing based on the way it reads, and I wish that wasn't the case because the topic deserves better than this. [Edit: Although I recognise that em dashes are what a lot of people use to identify AI-generated text, that isn't what I was doing here. I hadn't even been considering the…
Holy s@#$! You're right. I didn't catch it at first, probably because it was on the HN frontpage. But yeah, the amount of em dashes (among other things) totally gives it away. There were so many contradictions in the article, I was going to point them out. Don't see a point now.
I don't believe this article is largely AI-generated. It reads to me like the work of every marketer who has learned a list of "best practices" and sticks to them rigorously. It's probably also been edited so it aligns with Grammarly's or Hemingway's view of good writing.
Plus, some people seem to think that any polished, professional writing is LLM-ish because that's the style LLMs often imitate (badly).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looks like that article was AI generated by a SEO consultant. Ironically, if anything "broke" the web, it's ADs and SEO... Sorry, the article itself was really painful for me to read.
Rather amusingly, the author recently espoused the viewpoint that bloggers who wanted to stand out should avoid using tools like ChatGPT: https://youtu.be/avASDgtw9k0?t=678 It's not obvious to me that this blog post was synthesized whole cloth from an LLM. On the other hand, in that same interview, the author encourages the use of LLMs for idea exploration, and it's entirely possible that this is what he did. In fact…