No CSS, No JavaScript. Longevity on the Web

37 pointsposted 12 hours ago
by jollyjerry
(jch.github.io)

9 Comments

mb2100

2 hours ago

Totally, agree. And new HTML elements (like <dialog>) and CSS features (like MPA cross-document view transitions) have made client-side JavaScript unnecessary for a loot more use-cases in recent years. This is something a lot of devs unfortunately haven't caught up on, especially if they were stuck in their framework's tiny world.

This inspired me to explore what the simplest possible framework/site generator could be, that still has great DX: https://mastrojs.github.io/

soulofmischief

an hour ago

Thanks for sharing. However, this page needs code examples front and center. I read the whole page and still have no idea of the ergonomics of the framework.

jollyjerry

8 hours ago

Left out of the post, but the stack is rails, turbo, and stimulus. Hosted on a 2016 MacBook Pro with a dead battery in my closet

joz1-k

5 hours ago

I think the HTML, CSS and even JavaScript are the most stable and future-proof components of your stack. Your Rails backend, on the other hand, will experience far more changes and API instability in the long run.

JavaScript was considered as a unstable and under-specified part of the Web in the "Dynamic HTML" era somewhere between 1997-2006, when Microsoft Internet Explorer implementation of DOM diverged from more standard Netscape/Firefox in many tricky ways. This has largely been solved by better standards, initiatives like Acid tests and (unfortunately) slowly spiraling into Blink engine monoculture.

stephenlf

2 hours ago

Pretty dope stuff. My first thought with a finance tracker would have been “Dashboard? Interactivity? That’s a SPA.” Very pleased with your results.

tugberkk

6 hours ago

I still do not see a future without javascript. If you are not using any external libraries, why not use it?

anon1395

4 hours ago

> Why not use it?

You shouldn't try and find ways to add unnecessary javascript to your page.

stephenlf

2 hours ago

Some users, like journalists and the visually impaired, disable JavaScript. If you can make a product that works for them, why not do it?

Some web clients, like TTY-based clients, ignore both JavaScript AND CSS. People using these clients rightly expect to get a worse web experience overall. But if you can make a functional web page for them, why wouldn’t you?

These both sound like relatively niche edge cases. But nobody knows how things will change in the future.

tapirl

5 hours ago

Just use it when it is needed. Try don't use it when it is unnecessary.