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

291–300 of 328 posts

Re: All you may need is HTML

#291

Post by Dalewyn »

ozaark wrote: post #243
Dalewyn wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Table layouts are still superior to CSS in that they achieve the Holy Grail layout. As far as I'm aware, CSS still fails to achieve the Holy Grail within any reasonable realm of effort. Hell, the entire reason the internet moved from Holy Grail layouts to singular sidebar and vertically integrated layouts was because CSS can't into Holy Grail. With how wide most users' monitors are ever since 16:9 became commonplace,…

This doesn't add up. CSS grid, flex box, etc all do the "holy grail" layout with a couple lines. The tables mess that was early www was and remains an absolute mess of markdown to maintain for layout. Semantics and accessibility are practically out the window with table. HCI dictates how humans use interfaces and with that comes many defacto reasons why a plain text page does not solve the problems users want to solv…

>Do you not think websites test into the optimal performing layouts and content distribution?

No, I think most website devs left to their devices optimize for least effort to create and maintain.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#292

Post by franga2000 »

Dalewyn wrote: post #231
guiraldelli wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was happy to see someone finally referred to the motherfucking websites. On the other hand, I was disappointed to see the unique one of those I think it is worth to follow the advice [1] was not cited. For curiosity reasons, I found out about [1] on a well-known website [2] that definitely puts content in front of presentation, even though I like their website's design. [1]: https://bestmotherfucking.website/ [2]:…

I know whitespace is "wasted" file size for transport purposes, but god damn that HTML on Better and Best are unreadable without proper indentations.

The source is on GitHub, you're basically looking at "machine code" for the browser. But if you want to verify it's the same code, it isn't obfuscated, so just run a beautifier over it and compare. Best of both worlds.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#293

Post by qup »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #281
qup wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a good example, his site is very readable (because of the limited width of lines), and the sites he linked to that were largely unstyled were very useful, but not very readable. It would be worth it to me, as a user, to use a browser plugin to add a few lines of CSS to those sites before I dove in.

If you want different window width, browser is usually resizable.

I don't want a different window width, I want a different line width.

And as mentioned, I achieve it myself with a style extension.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#294

Post by andrepd »

ryloric wrote: post #134
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…

> 7 fucking declarations. That's how much CSS it took to turn that grotesque pile of shit into this easy-to-read masterpiece. Such drastic difference with basic adjustments, damn

That gray text is very bad for legibility, and so is the line spacing. 1.2 tops, and stick to black on white or very very light gray.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#295

Post by ccanassa »

crabbone wrote: post #87

Some years ago I was interviewing for head of automation position, and in the process was asked how'd I go about making sure a Web admin interface (to a product that by and large doesn't need a Web interface, think, in the same category as Kubernetes) is well-tested. To which I responded that I'd not use any JavaScript. Ideally, XML with stylesheets. Very light-weight, renders extremely fast, and is extremely friendl…

That's basically how the Django admin works. It's just HTML rendered at the backend. They had to add some javascript here and there but it's very minimal.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#296

Post by myfonj »

ryandrake wrote: post #178
horsawlarway wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I know. Back in the fun days when a browser was supposed to be my "user" agent. Before they became the mini-os they are today. There's nothing here that would stop you from still doing that. But if we're talking about practicality... I think far more people would get a benefit from improved defaults (as long as they're not breaking existing sites). While I've modified the user styles for my chrome profile as a p…

I want to hug this whole thread. Yes, 1. browsers should improve their defaults. 2. web sites should respect user preferences over their own style, if the preferences are set. 3. browsers should make user preferences more prominent and provide an easier way to override web sites that refuse to honor them. My browsing experience should not be determined by an artist or product designer 1000 miles away from me in an of…

Well put.

My language skills and time pressure fails me here, just wanted to express general "thanks folks" for your reactions as well. Seeing that someone shares similar point of view on this topic made me surprisingly very happy, so thank you again.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#297

Post by klodolph »

unxdfa wrote: post #285
klodolph wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Point being you can resize the window to where it’s comfortable rather than have a narrow column forced upon you.

Oh, well I like to have multiple tabs open, so that doesn’t work for me.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#298

Post by cmdialog »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #279
cmdialog wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

All function and no form is much much better than broken function and broken form which is the modern web 2.0. Feel free to find a site better than http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

Why are you even browsing websites that have any design then? Why are you even browsing in anything other than lynx? Please spare me seeing that ideologically boring site again

Like I can barely imagine what your house might look like. Just like a purely functional weathered hovel with the absolutely barest essentials. A perfect prison cell

Re: All you may need is HTML

#299

Post by GoblinSlayer »

cmdialog wrote: post #298
GoblinSlayer wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All function and no form is much much better than broken function and broken form which is the modern web 2.0. Feel free to find a site better than http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

Why are you even browsing websites that have any design then? Why are you even browsing in anything other than lynx? Please spare me seeing that ideologically boring site again Like I can barely imagine what your house might look like. Just like a purely functional weathered hovel with the absolutely barest essentials. A perfect prison cell

Web 2.0 design can be fixed so some extent by disabling javascript and sometimes disabling styles.

Re: All you may need is HTML

#300

Post by j45 »

brigandish wrote: post #269
j45 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. If the background color changes that often, I'm assuming there's probably a good test out there for that and more. The text was readable as designed on a white-background. CSS that considers accessibility or print friendly is always good to add.

> I'm assuming there's probably a good test out there for that and more. Javascript test?

Yeah there's lots of a Javascript or css or html validators out there, and likely geared towards checking against a set of best practices.

If it was a javascript that checked for the elements you want to ensure is there that would be neat too, I just wouldn't want it to be just me :)

Post reply on HN