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

Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

weborigami.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#71

Post by nkrisc »

chefandy wrote: post #70
nkrisc wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would that work? Now one request for a page becomes N requests for every bit of HTML the client needs to render?

That’s sorta the case with frames and asynchronously loaded stuff anyway though right? I think they just consider the problem solved in practice through scripting and frames. Besides, HTML doesn’t have room for that— they need room for all the features nobody uses and cares about. XD I’ve been writing HTML to some extent for 30 years and I periodically come across shit— not even new shit— that I swear I’ve never even…

> That’s sorta the case with frames and asynchronously loaded stuff anyway though right?

Yeah, and that's not something to emulate. And if so, it sort of already exists in the spec: iframe.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#72

Post by toyg »

animex wrote: post #46
sabellito wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do that. Duplicating the header, menu, and footer manually on every page is a pain in the ass. Not to mention the lack of minification.

I think this issue better addressed in HTML spec. Basic functionality to include html snippets files in other HTML files should be standard. What am I missing?

It is - it is called frames.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#73

Post by chefandy »

nkrisc wrote: post #71
chefandy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s sorta the case with frames and asynchronously loaded stuff anyway though right? I think they just consider the problem solved in practice through scripting and frames. Besides, HTML doesn’t have room for that— they need room for all the features nobody uses and cares about. XD I’ve been writing HTML to some extent for 30 years and I periodically come across shit— not even new shit— that I swear I’ve never even…

> That’s sorta the case with frames and asynchronously loaded stuff anyway though right? Yeah, and that's not something to emulate. And if so, it sort of already exists in the spec: iframe.

I’m not sure how it could possibly make the problem worse if the problem is already endemic to modern websites in a form far more heavily used than that ever would be.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#74

Post by schwartzworld »

sabellito wrote: post #40
zwnow wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats wrong with just using HTML, Js and CSS for personal projects?

I do that. Duplicating the header, menu, and footer manually on every page is a pain in the ass. Not to mention the lack of minification.

Serverside includes are a thing in Apache or nginx.

If you don’t mind a little coding, it wouldn’t take long to build a tool that lets you store the bodies as template files, wraps them in the header/footer, and minifies them.

Even less effort is pandoc’s standalone mode which lets you provide a wrapper template.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#75

Post by gibbitz »

schwartzworld wrote: post #74
sabellito wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do that. Duplicating the header, menu, and footer manually on every page is a pain in the ass. Not to mention the lack of minification.

Serverside includes are a thing in Apache or nginx. If you don’t mind a little coding, it wouldn’t take long to build a tool that lets you store the bodies as template files, wraps them in the header/footer, and minifies them. Even less effort is pandoc’s standalone mode which lets you provide a wrapper template.

Yeah SSI solved this 30 years ago. It's kind of a fire and forget solution too.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#76

Post by sabellito »

chefandy wrote: post #56
hereonout2 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I follow, do you not use templates and scripts to generate the static pages? I was a web developer 25 years ago and for the majority of projects we only made static sites, all templated and minified. My skills are somewhat "of that time". Recently I was asked to build a site to demonstrate some new software. It consisted of over 10k pages that once built would rarely, if ever be updated. I just scripted and…

What the grandparent comment was referring to was eschewing static site generators in favor of entirely handmade html and css. The person you’re responding to was arguing in favor of static site generators for the reasons they listed. I was advocating for a simpler breed of SSGs than we have now for simple tasks, and this project seems to fit that niche. Most SSGs these days are only trivial if you’ve got current web…

Yes, that's what I meant.

Re: Web Origami, for making websites where you can understand how they’re made

#77

Post by johnchristopher »

animex wrote: post #46
sabellito wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do that. Duplicating the header, menu, and footer manually on every page is a pain in the ass. Not to mention the lack of minification.

I think this issue better addressed in HTML spec. Basic functionality to include html snippets files in other HTML files should be standard. What am I missing?

Wouldn't that just ends up re-inventing XML and ?
Post reply on HN