I didn't even use a framework and chose to just use libraries and implement the features only if I need them. Probably it took more than just using a framework but it's pretty minimal and I know all the parts of my toolchain. And I learned much more than I could learn if I used a framework.
The Static Site Paradox
251–260 of 370 posts
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#252I have whole rants about this, based on bitter experience trying to convince marketing people to stop using WP and just use a static site. It comes down to ease of editing. A WP site optimises for the editor. Not the hosting, not the tech folk, not the accountants, and definitely not the reader. The people who edit the site get to say how it's implemented. If you give them the choice (as I have) between a site that r…
Your comment is the height of arrogance and user-hostility. The idea that they should accept a sub-par solution not of their choosing just for the developer's convenience is absurd.
Each blog post is going to get written once, but read (hopefully) thousands of times. Why are we optimising the writing experience and not the reading experience?
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#253We’re dealing with this big time in Asheville now. When cell service came back at all, everyone had shitty intermittent 3G, and none of the websites we needed for basic survival information would load. A bunch of good people created some text only news sites, and today I noticed that the Buncombe county website finally has a low bandwidth site, but even then when I inspected it, it had 130k of bootstrap css and 50k o…
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#254I have whole rants about this, based on bitter experience trying to convince marketing people to stop using WP and just use a static site. It comes down to ease of editing. A WP site optimises for the editor. Not the hosting, not the tech folk, not the accountants, and definitely not the reader. The people who edit the site get to say how it's implemented. If you give them the choice (as I have) between a site that r…
They make choice, because they're the ones working with this daily. Their goal is to put content on display fast. Content varies a lot - often containing for eg. tables, which simply don't work well in markdown or images you need to host somewhere. I spent a lot of time looking and still hasn't found toolchain, that would allow interns with zero technical experience deliver edits, without getting involved in tech det…
So yeah, it's not down to technical experience required for the edit process.
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#255In 2016, I was working at an agency making brochureware for local businesses. I remember one of our clients wanted us to add a small iframe for a reservation system to their website they had built. They sent us a single word document. Turns out they were just exporting it as HTML (which it seems like Word does still support today!) and throwing it onto some cheap shared web hosting provider. It worked great for them.…
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
well, people without 4G or a later phone model probably don't have the money for your $5 per month service anyways, so why care about them at all /s
I know you meant this sarcastically. BUT, when traveling, my phone has a free 3g, unlimited data plan. So, you run into these problems even in modern society.
all i was able to do was to send and receive signal/telegram/etc. messages...
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#257I have whole rants about this, based on bitter experience trying to convince marketing people to stop using WP and just use a static site. It comes down to ease of editing. A WP site optimises for the editor. Not the hosting, not the tech folk, not the accountants, and definitely not the reader. The people who edit the site get to say how it's implemented. If you give them the choice (as I have) between a site that r…
This is the issue. I'm an engineer, and I moved away from WP years ago, now I use ghost. But wordpress gives you that feeling of control, that you just need to search for "online store", and you get 100 plugins, including woocommerce, that are full blown ecommerce platforms. It's less the blogging, and more the customizable application that laymen can hammer into their desired function by clicking and dragging, no co…
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#258I have whole rants about this, based on bitter experience trying to convince marketing people to stop using WP and just use a static site. It comes down to ease of editing. A WP site optimises for the editor. Not the hosting, not the tech folk, not the accountants, and definitely not the reader. The people who edit the site get to say how it's implemented. If you give them the choice (as I have) between a site that r…
I switched to a SSG for the ease of editing! Offline, version-controlled editing with regular expressions, linters and other text-based magic. When you maintain a few hundred pages for a living, this is a game changer. For the average user though, you are 100% correct. You need a UI that they will understand. Explaining git to them is not a good idea.
Making everything convenient for the user has been a thorn in my industry for a long, long time, resulting in massive, complex machinery that is controlled by an HMI which amounts to "user push, machine go" and copious amounts of magic happen between those two steps.
I see the same issue as I enter software development. We treat the users like ridiculous idiots, shackling them the ignorance that come with convenience. The auto industry excels at this, selling $30,000USD products to people who can't change an oil filter or explain in basic terms how an ICE works.
I'm ranting, sorry, but what I am getting at is all this drive to make everything as convenient as possible without teaching the user anything does many bad things;
1. Denies users any enrichment, leaving them stuck making the same decisions over and over without expanding a skill.
2. Creates a Culture of Dependency, where users don't understand anything about the product they are using aside from the most basic operations, leaving them unable to pivot as things change, or troubleshoot when things inevitably break.
3. Adding to 2, when all the power is shifted to the folks who make the magic work in the product, they start doing user-hostile things with it like the copious amounts of data harvesting and privacy violations of the modern Internet, not to mention extracting their piece of the value pie to an egregious level.
As someone who is constantly learning new things to try and stay current, fights for the right to repair and uses FOSS whenever possible, I just can't get behind the thinking that brings is to the conclusion that marketers should be making these kinds of decisions based on convenience.
I bid you goodluck and farewell as I die on that downvote hill.
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment is the height of arrogance and user-hostility. The idea that they should accept a sub-par solution not of their choosing just for the developer's convenience is absurd.
I think you missed the point. It's not the developer's convenience. It's the readers. Each blog post is going to get written once, but read (hopefully) thousands of times. Why are we optimising the writing experience and not the reading experience?
The GP doesn't have a point to miss.
Re: The Static Site Paradox
#260I tried the SuperHTML on a hand-coded site of mine and it reported only one problem and that problem is incorrect as far as I can tell. It tells me that the ` ` tag is never opened on an HTML 5 doc with a ` ` opening tag. The author does say it's not perfect and I probably need to double-check my understanding just to be sure. In any case, it seems like a useful thing and I am also surprised I never thought it was mi…
According to the specs the tag can be fully omitted. From MDN [1]: > The start tag may be omitted if the first thing inside the element is not a comment. > The end tag may be omitted if the element is not immediately followed by a comment. 1: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/ht...
I've tried omitting those tags, but I decided that in the end things are easier to read when you do include them, so nowadays I always include them when I write HTML.