Victor

I’m in the same boat going the opposite way. I want to move my server stuff to separate hardware from my main PC.

Those things are super important, IMO. For sure. Important services for society.

Yep, I remember that. (I’m old.)

Not even a noscript tag at all or anything, yeah. Very bad.

I think we’re on the same page here. Your reply seems to me to argue against the people who are completely against JavaScript and who treat its very presence like a complete site-breaking bug. I am not of their opinion either. But I do sympathize with the sentiment that it is being used for evil.

Ah yes. Progressive enhancement, I remember that. I wonder when and how that morphed into graceful degradation.

Not sure that was the issue. I mean more that if you use only HTML and CSS all you’ll be able to create would be static sites that only change the contents of the page by full reloads. 🙂

Good stuff!

lol, no argument here, to be fair 😄

I had a bit of trouble following that first paragraph. I don’t understand what it is that you say it sounds like I’m saying.

Either way, none of what you wrote I disagree with. I feel the same. Bad design does not elicit trust.

😆 that do be what they sound like

That’s excellent.

And what do you make that doesn’t include JavaScript? Like what kind of software/website/content? If you don’t mind sharing, of course.

Does that little snippet include suggestions, like I mentioned? Of course it’s easier with less functionality.

What country or area would that be?

And what do you mean by “do it”? What is it exactly that you do or make without JavaScript?

Of course it depends, like all things. But in my mind, there’s a few select, very specific types of pages that wouldn’t require at least a bit of JavaScript these days. Very static, non-changing, non-interactive. Even email could work/has worked with HTML only. But the experience is severely limited and reduced, of course.

If you have static content, then sure, serve up some SSR HTML. But pages with even static content usually have some form of interactivity, like searching (suggestions/auto-complete), etc. 🤷‍♂️

I also have the right to self-censor myself for effect. 👍👍

😆 F—ck, I hear you loud and clear on that one. But that’s a different problem altogether, organizing information.

People suck at that. I don’t think they ever even use their own site or have it tested on anyone before shipping. Sometimes it’s absolutely impossible to find information about something, like even what a product even is or does. So stupid.

If you want to zoom into a graph plot, you want each wheel scroll tick to be sent to the server to generate a new image and a full page reload?

How would you even detect the mouse wheel scroll?

All interactivity goes out the door.

CSS doing most of the heavy-lifting java is usually crutched to do

JavaScript you mean? Some small subset of things that JavaScript was forced to handle before can be done in CSS, yes, but that only goes for styling and layout, not interactivity, obviously.

I did webdev before the framework blight. That’s the basis for my claim that javascript lamers are just lazy

There is some extremely heavy prejudice and unnecessary hate going on here, which is woefully misdirected. Well get to that. But the amount of time that has passed since you did web dev might put you at a disadvantage to make claims about web development these days. 👍

Anyway. Us JavaScript/TypeScript “lamers” are doing the best with what we’ve got. The web platform is very broken and fragmented because of its history. It’s not something regular web devs can do much about. We use the framework or library that suits us best for the task at hand and the resources we are given (time, basically). It’s not like any project will be your dream unicorn project where you get to decide the infrastructure from the start or get to invent a new library or a new browser to target that does things differently and doesn’t have to be backwards compatible with the web at large. Things don’t work this way.

Don’t you think we sigh all day because we have to monkey patch the web to make our sites behave in the way the acceptance criteria demand? You call that lazy, but we are working our knuckles to the bone to make things work reasonably well for as many people as we can, including accessibility for those with reduced function. It’s not an easy task.

… “Lazy.” I scoffed in offense, to be honest with you.

It’s like telling someone who made bread from scratch they’re lazy for not growing their own wheat, ffs.

Let’s see you do better. 👍👍👍👍👍👍