Re: [whatwg] HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without Javascript

Bobby,
stop talking about "comfort zone" and "scared programmers" and start acting
like a person who considers anybody else worth discussing with, instead of
a bunch of stupid people acting for their own interest.
What you propose is as complex and impractical as a JS framework is.
Moreover, an author should either learn very well SQL or learn "your"
variant of the language which is translated into SQL statements, something
you seem not to consider.

> Not ad hominem.  I’ve literally had developers tell me everyone should
learn Javascript.  Example:
https://twitter.com/yoavweiss/status/582490158496419840
> That's obviously a horrible idea.  Why would anyone encourage millions of
other people to do more work?   Everyone’s time is limited.  Why should a
fashion-blogger spend time to learn JS to get a responsive high-speed
site?  They have other things to worry about, like next season’s
collections.
I strongly hope you are joking. If the fashion blogger does not know how to
work with JS, s/he will either stick with ready-made sites or blogs, or ask
to someone capable to build the site for him/her. It's not just because
anyone can be a fashion blogger, that anyone can build a website too. The
former activity needs no skills (apart from some taste, while the
definition of "taste" is quite non-uniform), while the latter needs
technical skills, And your proposal will need technical skills as well -
not on the JS side, but in HTML.

> I was talking with a Tumblr power user a couple of days ago about this
and she confirmed that all Tumblr kids pretty much know the basics of HTML,
somewhat fewer people know CSS, and nobody knows Javascript.
<sarcasm>Well, this means that we must also simplify CSS, don't you think
so? all that stuff about media queries, about animation and transitions,
pseudo-elements, pseudo-classes, how can poor Tumblr users learn
that?</sarcasm>
<sarcasm type="hard">It's a real luck that Tumblr kids, who obviously
constitute the bulk of modern authorship, know HTML well enough to also
learn your complex two-way control/view model (I still find it complex
somehow, I'm not as smart as they are of course. Evidence: I'm stuck in my
JS comfort zone).</sarcasm>

I repeat the assumption I did in my private message, that you haven't
probably had the time to read. You seem to swing freely between saying "no"
to JS frameworks and saying "no" to JS as a whole. When and why you did
elaborate the idea that JS is not part of Website building? When did you
decide that web pages have to be HTML and CSS and SQL, while half the HTML
we have now is also defined in terms of "objects" with "properties" and
"methods"? Want to say no to frameworks? Stick to basic properties for
objects.

Keep on fighting against JS, and you will look like someone who is trying
to abandon CSS in favor of <font> tags and @width/@height attributes
because they're "simpler".

2015-04-02 10:23 GMT+02:00 Rimantas Liubertas <rimantas@gmail.com>:

> > I gave a limited one-page idea for now, so design faults should be
> obvious. This will take years, but right now it’s looking like there aren’t
> fundamental problems with the proposal.
>
> There are fundamental problems with your proposal, namely:
> 1) it relies on some undefined magic
> 2) it changes HTML to something entirely different.
> 3) you assume that those not willing to learn Javascript will somehow know
> how to use the features you propose without learning. How?
>
> > That's obviously a horrible idea. Why would anyone encourage millions of
> other people to do more work? Everyone’s time is limited. Why should a
> fashion-blogger spend time to learn JS to get a responsive high-speed site?
> They have other things to worry about, like next season’s collections.
> >
> > The best experience should be on by default, and you need a built-in MVC
> framework in HTML for that to happen.
> And fashion designer will be able to use it without learning? Also it is
> not clear, how are you going to separate M from V from C if it is all HTML.
> > You’ll find that the kind of proposal I’m putting out there is the only
> viable solution.
>
> Your proposal is just a bit of magical thinking, not any solution. I am
> not sure what problem are you trying to solve.
> Is that ‘allow non-technical people to build web-sites’? Then you are
> solving it at the wrong level.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Rimantas
>
>

Received on Thursday, 2 April 2015 11:09:15 UTC