Live data from Hacker News

On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

w3c.studio24.net

61–70 of 208 posts

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#61
post #52
post #3

Not choosing and inaccessible platform was the right thing to do. Hopefully this will make Automattic reconsider their priorities regarding web accessibility. Related write-up: https://adrianroselli.com/2020/09/gutenberg-accessibility-co...

Ironic that the link looks kinda... terrible. I can read it, but it's not pleasant at all.

Design is entirely broken in Firefox on android... Half the header is cut off etc

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#62

Glad they realized the issues of Wordpress but a shame they went with proprietary nonsense with a faux license. A php based platform has a lot of negatives for scalability. Using a cms to generate static content is much more simple, scalable and cheaper. Keep it simple.

WP is php, and it tends to take a ton of plugins of various quality, vendors and support to get it to where you want it. Last I looked at it, it didn’t even support multi-language out of the box.

"Various quality" is a very mild expression for it already.

Add to that the tendencies of many to use PHP directly as a way of cutting pages into non-modular non-composable pieces, that can only be concattenated instead of used everywhere, and add to that a mix of PHP, HTML, CSS and JS in the same file ... well you are set up for a catastrophe in terms of maintainability, which maps closely to how most plugins for WP are written.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#63
post #3

Not choosing and inaccessible platform was the right thing to do. Hopefully this will make Automattic reconsider their priorities regarding web accessibility. Related write-up: https://adrianroselli.com/2020/09/gutenberg-accessibility-co...

“This post is only visible to RSS feed readers, unless you got here by manually parsing the feed (weirdo) or someone shared the link with you (they probably should not have).”

wat

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#65

> The use of React complicates front-end build. We have very talented front-end developers, however, they are not React experts - nor should they need to be. > I believe front-end should be built as standards-compliant HTML/CSS with JavaScript used to enrich functionality where necessary and appropriate. This is what worries me about React (and with other front end frameworks in general). I'm writing this as someone…

I think this is an easy misconception to get from the article. But react is just used for instances of the editor inside of WordPress admin because editors are extraordinarily dynamic and interactive. I would suggest that editors are one of the best examples of things that should be SPAs!

Any “front end” HTML is generated via PHP. No relation to react :) indeed, most of the accessibility issues with WordPress are in gutenberg itself, not the front end content. (When I say front end, I mean stuff you would see browsing the site as a normal user.)

> are they being disenfranchised by the modern frameworks?

Though this isn’t exactly your point, this is brought up a lot in relation to gutenberg. The reason gutenberg needs something like react is because it needs to be a lot more powerful than a simple text form. And it needs to be a lot more powerful because many WordPress users struggled to accomplish anything other than basic text formatting in the classic editor. Gutenberg is moving a lot of disparate concepts under the same roof now, and it provides / will provide a uniform, standard way for editing many parts of your site.

While yes, this is a technology shift for developers (you need to be a lot more comfortable with JS to build tools for the editor), it’s still a big win for users who aren’t developers as they can accomplish much more with less effort and knowledge. Sure, some things might be a little more effort now than they were previously due to rough spots in the experience, but overall it unlocks a lot more functionality in the long run.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#66

> The use of React complicates front-end build. We have very talented front-end developers, however, they are not React experts - nor should they need to be. > I believe front-end should be built as standards-compliant HTML/CSS with JavaScript used to enrich functionality where necessary and appropriate. This is what worries me about React (and with other front end frameworks in general). I'm writing this as someone…

I wonder if you could blend the two approaches. Let people think in terms of documents that feel static. But wrap them in a navigation system that benefits from components.

The trend is always to make every element of a document a component which is great for technical efficiency but removes a lot of flexibility. A document is still a good abstraction.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#67
post #63
post #3

Not choosing and inaccessible platform was the right thing to do. Hopefully this will make Automattic reconsider their priorities regarding web accessibility. Related write-up: https://adrianroselli.com/2020/09/gutenberg-accessibility-co...

“This post is only visible to RSS feed readers, unless you got here by manually parsing the feed (weirdo) or someone shared the link with you (they probably should not have).” wat

How dare you not use RSS. Go to hell.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#68
post #63
post #3

Not choosing and inaccessible platform was the right thing to do. Hopefully this will make Automattic reconsider their priorities regarding web accessibility. Related write-up: https://adrianroselli.com/2020/09/gutenberg-accessibility-co...

“This post is only visible to RSS feed readers, unless you got here by manually parsing the feed (weirdo) or someone shared the link with you (they probably should not have).” wat

There's a link to the RSS Club in the next sentence. I broke the "second rule of RSS Club", because I feel accessibility advocacy is more important.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#69

Glad they realized the issues of Wordpress but a shame they went with proprietary nonsense with a faux license. A php based platform has a lot of negatives for scalability. Using a cms to generate static content is much more simple, scalable and cheaper. Keep it simple.

PHP scales fine especially serving mostly static content. Not sure why that's even being used as an argument against choosing WordPress. There are valid concerns, this isn't one of them.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#70
I kind of feel for these guys. This kind of project is the worst (massive, content/maintenance-heavy website with many admin users .. urghh). And given that they are likely to be heavily scrutinized on whatever direction they take, I mean it's pretty much lose lose (I really hope they are killer designers). That said, reading the blog post took me back to 2013 .. symfony/PHP? If I was the W3C product manager I really wouldn't be confident with the technical approach. It reeks of confusion, and appears to be relying on others for technical leadership. The W3C should be leading the way here. The approach should be something you write about and people go wow! They nailed it. At the moment it sounds like someone's googled accessibility and is in the process of pushing high-contrast lemons through the orange peeler.
Post reply on HN