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

The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 387 posts

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#341

Post by rkangel »

ogre_codes wrote: post #10

This is a fantastic article, it does miss one very key point about bog-standard HTML which is worth mentioning though. The standard widgets are all accessible, people with screen readers, limited mobility, poor vision, etc, all rely on pages being written so the devices they use to read the web can function properly. People who choose to eschew these standard components very frequently end up with a site which is unu…

Designing for people with disabilities usually increases the overall UX for everyone. I see it a bit like resistance training for fitness - you train in a 'more difficult than normal' scenario, and then when you return to normal it feels much easier.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#342

Post by jbj »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #339
jbj wrote: post #189

Made me think of a time I didnt do adequate research before buying an expensive flight ticket: I was in Changi Airport and had a cheap return ticket to Malaysia, when I got back I was going to travel in the east coast of Australia for a few weeks as the end of my study abroad in Asia. It dawned to me that I never actually checked the Visa rules for Australia, but just pressumed that they would be like any othet commo…

Another example: a train schedule site that requires the latest approved browser. If you want to travel, first make sure you're not in the middle of nowhere.

Talking about the sun ... We got a variant of those credit card sized NFC cards to check in to public transit, the issuer decided that they should have an expiry date. From what I remember reading in local tech news, the logic was that people bend/break them over time, making them have a measurable lifespan.

My card actually expired in the middle of the countryside, and phone support just told me to get a replacement in the nearest convenience store.

I could have been prepared for this if I had checked the expiry date and put it in my calendar, but how many people do this?

btw, apologies for typos in my post above, it went quick, and was typed on touch screen.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#343

Post by TheCoelacanth »

inopinatus wrote: post #261
elliekelly wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Very few people have the skill to turn a div into an effective button, yet over and over I see web sites with rows of buttons which are in fact just divs with javascript behind them. What was the catalyst behind this trend? I just don’t understand the reason behind it. Hasn’t been around forever? Was there some limitation on the button tag that made the div tag more desirable?

Ironically, it's because of the ARIA Authoring Practices guidelines[1], which include exactly this sort of nonsense[2]. [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/ [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/#examples

That seems like a misinterpretation of ARIA guidelines. I'm pretty sure the guidelines are meant as "if you are going to use a div as a button, do this", not "do this instead of using a button".

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#344

Post by falcolas »

auggierose wrote: post #340
brigandish wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would you read PDFs on a smart phone anyway? Is there another option here?

Yeah, read it on a large tablet, or on a large computer display.

Ironic to read this comment in an article of someone reading a web page on a PSP.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#345

Post by inopinatus »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #343
inopinatus wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, it's because of the ARIA Authoring Practices guidelines[1], which include exactly this sort of nonsense[2]. [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/ [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/#examples

That seems like a misinterpretation of ARIA guidelines. I'm pretty sure the guidelines are meant as "if you are going to use a div as a button, do this", not "do this instead of using a button".

Quite so.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#346

Post by greggturkington »

userbinator wrote: post #280
greggturkington wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. tags for presentation (with no `alt` attr). Form s without s. No skip link, no landmark regions. s with s inside for non-tabular content. tags. FONT TAGS. "A breath of fresh hair" is a typo that accidentally makes a good comparison.

Nonetheless, the fact that it works in browsers as old as IE6 (haven't tried anything before that) is living proof of the fact that dogmatic "best practices" cargo-culting is, practically speaking, of zero or even negative value.

That idea is progressive enhancement, is a best practice, and has been around for two decades

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#347

Post by greggturkington »

yen223 wrote: post #242
greggturkington wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. tags for presentation (with no `alt` attr). Form s without s. No skip link, no landmark regions. s with s inside for non-tabular content. tags. FONT TAGS. "A breath of fresh hair" is a typo that accidentally makes a good comparison.

Hacker news has divs for the upvote/downvote buttons too, which apparently is a cardinal sin

For accessibility and on general principle, you should use a for a button.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#348

Post by falcolas »

anderspitman wrote: post #337
GoblinSlayer wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read simple html as plain text just fine.

Maybe for some definitions of "you"

As long as the HTML file is not minified, they're quite readable.

It's just plain text with some markup

.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#349

Post by zepto »

ogre_codes wrote: post #273
zepto wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“ Nor should they need to.” It’s funny - I’d expect an interior designer to know something about the limitations of the materials they work with. Why don’t we expect this of digital designers?

Interior designers know their limits too. For example a good one won't try to move walls without consulting an engineer. I think that's somewhat like what the relationship between designers and developers should be.

Perhaps so - but not understanding styling options for a component seems like the wrong limit.

Re: The unreasonable effectiveness of simple HTML

#350

Post by hsitz »

lastofthemojito wrote: post #114
ogre_codes wrote: post #10

This is a fantastic article, it does miss one very key point about bog-standard HTML which is worth mentioning though. The standard widgets are all accessible, people with screen readers, limited mobility, poor vision, etc, all rely on pages being written so the devices they use to read the web can function properly. People who choose to eschew these standard components very frequently end up with a site which is unu…

One of the great things about accessibility is that it often doesn't just benefit people with disabilities. My wife and I have watched a lot of TV in the past year with the volume down and captioning on, while we enjoy some down time while our baby is sleeping. A ramped entrance to a building allows wheelchair-bound folks access, but it also helps able-bodied people using delivery dollies. Making simple, lightweight…

> . . .also saves power consumption, time, and frustration for folks on M1 MacBook Pros.

Did you mean to say ". . . for folks /not/ on M1 Macbook Pros"?

Post reply on HN