OT: "web applications" (was: No more html)


(Marvin Gülker) #1

The general direction in which web development has been moving is
something I don't like... Your suggestion is the obvious next step, but
still, I think the web of documents vanishes in favour of "web
applications" that require endless amounts of client-side JavaScript
code to run. I'm a happy NoScript user for privacy reasons, and this
direction web design takes makes it harder for people who care about
privacy like me every day.

"But I need to sell it", "the customer wants it"! Yeah, I know. The
customer also wants my data. Please, when you design a website,
keep it at least usable without JS at some bare level. There's no reason
why something that could well be done using static HTML needs to be done
with client-side JS. Simple blogs that tell me to enable JavaScript to
read a blog post (which is all about text!) are a notorious example of
bad decisions in my opinion.

...and now I crawl back into my dark cave and enjoy some surfing with a
text browser...

Marvin

···

Am 03. Februar 2018 um 16:38 Uhr +0100 schrieb Ivo Herweijer:

Yes, I know this is a Ruby mailing list and this post is about
webdevelopment. But I promise there is a happy Ruby ending to this
story.

--
Blog: https://mg.guelker.eu
PGP/GPG ID: F1D8799FBCC8BC4F


(Robert K.) #2

Hi Marvin!

Yes, I know this is a Ruby mailing list and this post is about
webdevelopment. But I promise there is a happy Ruby ending to this
story.

The general direction in which web development has been moving is
something I don't like... Your suggestion is the obvious next step, but
still, I think the web of documents vanishes in favour of "web
applications" that require endless amounts of client-side JavaScript
code to run. I'm a happy NoScript user for privacy reasons, and this
direction web design takes makes it harder for people who care about
privacy like me every day.

Did you try uMatrix yet? I have switched and never looked back. It did
help that NoScript changed their UI in a less helpful (IMO) way. Also,
it allows more fine granular control including cookies. End of
commercial. :wink:

"But I need to sell it", "the customer wants it"! Yeah, I know. The
customer also wants my data. Please, when you design a website,
keep it at least usable without JS at some bare level.

I agree to that, but:

There's no reason
why something that could well be done using static HTML needs to be done
with client-side JS.

Oh, there are reasons, for example, scalability. Using the client's
CPU can significantly offload server CPUs and it certainly scales
better. Plus, if there is more static content you can better utilize
CDNs giving a faster experience overall.

Simple blogs that tell me to enable JavaScript to
read a blog post (which is all about text!) are a notorious example of
bad decisions in my opinion.

Yes. But a blog does not have much logic, does it? If there is program
logic needed in a blog then it is either adverts or commenting.

...and now I crawl back into my dark cave and enjoy some surfing with a
text browser...

Links or lynx?

Cheers

robert

···

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Marvin Gülker <m-guelker@phoenixmail.de> wrote:

Am 03. Februar 2018 um 16:38 Uhr +0100 schrieb Ivo Herweijer:

--
[guy, jim, charlie].each {|him| remember.him do |as, often| as.you_can
- without end}
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/


(Easy Datawarehouse Solutions) #3

Hi Marvin,

Thanks for your reply.

The general direction in which web development has been moving is
something I don't like... Your suggestion is the obvious next step, but
still, I think the web of documents vanishes in favour of "web
applications" that require endless amounts of client-side JavaScript
code to run. I'm a happy NoScript user for privacy reasons, and this
direction web design takes makes it harder for people who care about
privacy like me every day.

I think Javascript itself is not to blame for invasion of our privacy. Just opening html pages allows you to be tracked. But I agree that Javascript can take tracking user behavior to the next level. I'm personally not very concerned about privacy. Regularly cleaning up cookies is as far as I go.

"But I need to sell it", "the customer wants it"! Yeah, I know. The
customer also wants my data. Please, when you design a website,
keep it at least usable without JS at some bare level.

You are right, every website should be usable without javascript. Not just for NoScripters, but also for screenreaders. I have added a link to the html for the Ferro website pointing to the markdown content files.

There's no reason
why something that could well be done using static HTML needs to be done
with client-side JS. Simple blogs that tell me to enable JavaScript to
read a blog post (which is all about text!) are a notorious example of
bad decisions in my opinion.

The saying 'if all you have is a hammer, all problems look like a nail' applies. With webdevelopers using all kinds of javascript libraries the thought of just using html is lost. In the case of the ferro website, this not a blog but a tech demo for a new technology aiming to get rid of html. That is my excuse for not using html :wink:

Cheers,
Ivo

···

Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2018 7:34 PM