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

HTML First

html-first.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 551 posts

Re: HTML First

#541

Post by nedt »

Sorry but this example is just bad

  
    Click Me
First of all people might have difficulties with the color green. So do you add alternatives as well, maybe with media queries, right here inline in HTML? Or do you just use the class *active* as in the discouraged example? And then you could make it even more accessible by providing aria attributes to signify the the active state. Depending on the use case you might not even need the class (you know ... leverage real html attributes).

There is a reason why semantics are more important than the concrete style and why they are separated. HTML and CSS first is a great idea but show more care for your users.

Re: HTML First

#542

Post by marcus_holmes »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #536
marcus_holmes wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experience I don't think product and management folks care much about the user experience either; it seems to be mostly ego and dick-measuring. My target user is someone running 3G on their phone on the commute home in a crowded train. The designer's sexy animations and carefully coordinated state changes are not worth the extra 100Kb of 3rd-party dependency JS required to get them to work, because the user i…

Unless you have anything more than anecdotes and feelings to contribute to this discussion, I don't think there's anything more to discuss. Data makes a more convincing argument for such bold claims, especially when a minority of practitioners claims that their way of doing things is more correct than a much larger majority. I will say, from your maligning of "product and management folks" to your anecdotally-driven…

some stereotypes exist for a reason

Re: HTML First

#543

Post by arcanemachiner »

hoosieree wrote: post #408
arcanemachiner wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISO-style timestamps are the only only one that makes any sense. YYYY-MM-DD or GTFO.

no need to fight over it, compromise is both elegant and simple: YMYY-YD-DM

A UTC-style compromise if ever there was one.

Re: HTML First

#544

Post by _gabe_ »

listenallyall wrote: post #534
_gabe_ wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> almost real-time connectivity with a database If only they actually worked like this. I’ve experienced, as I’m sure many other people have, problems booking flights, lodging, buying tickets, etc, where when I go to checkout it fails because I was too slow. It’s also much faster to only request smaller pieces of data if you can, instead of resending an entire web page and then re-rendering the whole web page. All th…

> problems booking flights, lodging, buying tickets, etc, where when I go to checkout it fails Because they are typically written using popular heavy frameworks! Big, expert teams of developers can't get it all bug-free and fast and smooth when working with them. Thank you for making my point better than I could. > only request smaller pieces of data if you can, instead of resending an entire web page and then re-ren…

I don’t understand why you’re bringing HTMX into this? This is a blog about HTML first, and the comment I originally responded too seemed to imply a more traditional MVC or SSR site was the way to go. It feels like you’re just searching for a “gotcha” argument at this point and not arguing in good faith.

My whole argument can be succinctly summed up by this comment from a different Hacker News user from when React was first announced:

> One of the biggest problems with the web platform is that we've spent the last 20 years trying to shim applications into a document framework. HTML was designed to help academics share research papers, not to replace native thick-client applications, yet that's the direction it's been evolving towards.

> I'm really happy to see Web Components (inc. Polymer, Angular, x-tags, and React) landing into HTML. If we accept that web apps != web pages at a spec level, hopefully we can build an awesome platform on which to create tools that leverage all the great parts of the web (linkable, available, auto-updating, device-agnostic) without the mess that we've made trying to make the web do something it wasn't designed for.[0]

This sentiment, after 10 years, is still spot on. The web isn’t academics sharing research papers anymore. Interactive web apps, whether you like it or not, require a ton of client side state management. React was developed to address concerns with managing that state and improving performance where HTML5 fell short. It still succeeds at that.

Of course, if you have a static site, don’t use React! But let’s not pretend there’s no use case for it either. There’s tradeoffs. And I’ll repeat that til the end of time. No matter what you choose, there’s tradeoffs.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5789055

Re: HTML First

#545

Post by listenallyall »

_gabe_ wrote: post #544
listenallyall wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> problems booking flights, lodging, buying tickets, etc, where when I go to checkout it fails Because they are typically written using popular heavy frameworks! Big, expert teams of developers can't get it all bug-free and fast and smooth when working with them. Thank you for making my point better than I could. > only request smaller pieces of data if you can, instead of resending an entire web page and then re-ren…

I don’t understand why you’re bringing HTMX into this? This is a blog about HTML first, and the comment I originally responded too seemed to imply a more traditional MVC or SSR site was the way to go. It feels like you’re just searching for a “gotcha” argument at this point and not arguing in good faith. My whole argument can be succinctly summed up by this comment from a different Hacker News user from when React wa…

> I don’t understand why you’re bringing HTMX into this?

Maybe because HTMX fits all the principles listed by the author? Or because it's specifically referenced in the article (3 times)?

Re: HTML First

#546

Post by YetAnotherNick »

It's easy to preach this. I went to the author's projects using the link in the bottom and found the first project[1] to be using 4 MB of CSS and 1 MB of javascript in the landing page, which is just a static signup.

In big projects, the generality of codebase and faster option to do one off tasks matter more rather than best design for the current task. And it is lot harder to have making codebase small or without libraries as a requirement.

[1]: https://clerkmoney.com/users/sign_in

Re: HTML First

#547

Post by strokirk »

zlg_codes wrote: post #328
iFreilicht wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting example. Why would you say VSCode is a mess? I feel like it's not in line with the current UX Zeitgeist I assume you're referring to (touch-first, wasteful whitespace, manipulative patterns, reduced functionality) at all. It provides multiple layers of access to functionality that allow the user to choose their trade-off between discoverability and speed. The UI is compact with very little padding and sho…

VS Code is a mess because there are few places I can click in the UI without triggering some weird part of the UI. Almost the entirety of the bottom bar is reactive. The sidebar has too many views to keep straight, it has an extension store or something? Using VS Code feels like handling a tool with no handle. I'm sure it has something useful but I feel overwhelmed and constrained when I use it. I can't depend on any…

Visual iconography doesn't need to transmit the same ideas to different users, it's there to reduce space taken but still be identifiable to an experienced user of the tool.

Re: HTML First

#548

Post by mmcnl »

ckolkey wrote: post #279
mmcnl wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The default date picker is laughable. For example there is no way to control the format in which the date is displayed.

Unless I'm mistaken, it's shown in a format localised to the user, so... i'd much rather you keep your hands off that, and I'll enjoy my DD.MM.YYYY

That would be easy, but if you have an app with localization then it's not useful. And also it's impossible to make the formatting consistent with other formatting in your app.

Re: HTML First

#549

Post by moritzwarhier »

robinson7d wrote: post #46
moritzwarhier wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't use Tailwind anymore at the moment, but in my experience, it does not lead to shipping massive CSS/JS resources. In fact I don't know about any client-side JS at all that is emitted by Tailwind (my last experience was 2.x, not sure if anything has changed). Regarding the CSS size, my experience was the opposite, Tailwind output was usually a lot smaller than hand-written CSS. I have nothing against plain CSS…

Did your experience involve the (recommended) build step? It uses, at least last I checked, a purgeCSS step to remove unused rules and decrease the css size.

This changed in tw 2, everything is generated on demand, PurgeCSS is no longer used.

Re: HTML First

#550

Post by moritzwarhier »

troupo wrote: post #41
moritzwarhier wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't use Tailwind anymore at the moment, but in my experience, it does not lead to shipping massive CSS/JS resources. In fact I don't know about any client-side JS at all that is emitted by Tailwind (my last experience was 2.x, not sure if anything has changed). Regarding the CSS size, my experience was the opposite, Tailwind output was usually a lot smaller than hand-written CSS. I have nothing against plain CSS…

I think what the OP meant is: Tailwind requires a build step to extract use classes. Otherwise you need to ship all of it.

It's true that it requires a build step, since tw 2, AFAIK there's not even a way anymore to ship "all of it". CSS rules are generated on-demand for the classes that match tailwinds syntax.
Post reply on HN