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

All you may need is HTML

fabiensanglard.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 328 posts

Re: All you may need is HTML

#201

Post by ozim »

crabbone wrote: post #131
ozim wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see you got downvoted but people don’t get that choice of technology based on who you can hire is a valid point. I remember a guy who wanted to make company documentation in LaTeX. Well yes it is great tool and we could put it in a git repo and render nice documents for the customers easily. Downside was 15-20 sales people who were not thrilled to use it and spend time learning how to use it.

Hey, I work in a company where user-facing documentation is written in LaTeX! I even contributed few commits to it. I'm not sure though why sales people would need to edit it. My discontent with LaTeX for documentation is that searching it sucks. I mean, you do get literal search for words, but if you want something smarter... PDFs don't interact well with searching tools we have. Another problem: interactive scroll.…

It is also a bit of a point of my post.

"Why sales people would need to edit it?"

Because there were no dedicated people writing documentation, there were developers and sales people - that was it. Non technical documentation so "how to use the system" was going to be written by sales people.

Lots of times in a company you work with what you have and finding and hiring "technical writer who has experience or wants to work with LaTeX" I would count as hard task.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#202

Post by vlunkr »

NoGravitas wrote: post #193
vlunkr wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be so great if there were more built-in interactive elements like tabs, modals, and tooltips. How many times have these incredibly basic things been re-created?

Yeah, all this time browser vendors should have been taking a "pave the cowpaths" approach to natively implementing stuff that everyone ends up reimplementing in CSS and JS. And HTML5 did a little of this, with e.g. date and color input fields. But they could have gone farther.

To disagree with my own point a bit, it’s unfortunate that the controls HTML5 added look different in every browser, and can’t be styled with CSS at all.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#203

Post by unxdfa »

bombcar wrote: post #46
truculent wrote: post #18

I sympathise with the main thrust of the post but, to nitpick, this is just plain wrong: > But mostly css appeals to our vanity and ego. Design isn't just about aesthetics. Good information design, clear visual hierarchy, accessibility, etc. all help with communication. The author's effective use of spacing, bold, and code tags show us that they know this intuitively, despite what they write.

Reminds me of http://motherfuckingwebsite.com and http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com But the key, underlying point to ALL this stuff is that you do NOT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT PRESENTATION until you have the CONTENT. A huge temptation is to spend hours and hours tweaking the presentation as a way of avoiding actually creating the content; this is the real danger. (should mention https://thebestmotherfucking.website of…

The second one is absolute shit on my 27" 5k display though. The first one is not.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#205

Post by blowski »

calsy wrote: post #190
stevenjgarner wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too oversimplified ... no images (with captions), no other media (video, audio), no tables or grids, etc.

almost gasp like a book.

I have quite a few books with a pretty cover, pictures, charts, pullquotes, etc.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#207

Post by NoGravitas »

agumonkey wrote: post #194
NoGravitas wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The default Emacs theme is not great, but the current best practice is to stop messing with themes and just use modus (vivendi or operandi depending on your light/dark preference), especially since they are now included as part of Emacs.

what's missing from vanilla ? honest question

There's nothing missing per se, but the contrast is not always good, and the highlight face is distracting.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#208

Post by klodolph »

unxdfa wrote: post #203
bombcar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of http://motherfuckingwebsite.com and http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com But the key, underlying point to ALL this stuff is that you do NOT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT PRESENTATION until you have the CONTENT. A huge temptation is to spend hours and hours tweaking the presentation as a way of avoiding actually creating the content; this is the real danger. (should mention https://thebestmotherfucking.website of…

The second one is absolute shit on my 27" 5k display though. The first one is not.

Could you elaborate? The first one is uncomfortable to me if you have a large browser window, because the lines of text are so long and it’s hard to follow. The second one at least fixes that problem.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#209

Post by cmdialog »

xigoi wrote: post #196
cmdialog wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my personal, obviously anecdotal, experience it's always the "technical" guys who think things like this. This is why we have UI/UX teams and we don't let programmers create visual interfaces.

If your idea of a good site is a 3MB monster full of useless whitespace, hero images, carousels, hamburger menus and other modern design trends, maybe that's a sign we shouldn't let designers create visual interfaces.

I really dodged a bullet there huh? Since that isn't my idea of a "good" site necessarily. But if your idea of a "good" site is all function and no form, then maybe stick to designing abstract interfaces and not things actual people have to see.
Post reply on HN