Ask HN: What is the word for reinventing browser features in JavaScript | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: What is the word for reinventing browser features in JavaScript

2 pointstboyd478 comments

Client is building a single-page web application using some framework, and normal browser conveniences (like back/forward navigation, direct links to content, etc.) are not supported. Users complain about not being able to navigate back and forth through screens easily, or go directly to a certain screen they need to go to. Developers go about recreating these lost features using copious amounts of client-side code.

How would you describe, politely, what is going on here? Is there an industry standard terminology that is understandable by all?

View on HN

I'm not aware of a specific catchy word that precisely describes that but I can imagine it would be useful to have one.

You could describe it in sentences though. Like, breaking standard browser features is not a good thing. Also it's really really hard but still possible to create single page applications that don't break those features and support direct links and back/forward buttons and everything.

So in a way they are being lazy or biting more than they can chew.

Found it: "false affordance." See my other comment below.

"NIH" Not Invented Here syndrome. If it was not invented here it is not used. Not paid to invent everything from scratch. Paid to implement features. Success is achieved by applying not best practices but proven practices. If it works use it regardless of the source as long as it was not stolen.

It is not an automatic preference for in-house solutions, but just not being aware of how to take advantage of known UI patterns on the web. The problem is I have no slogan or buzzword to hang this concept on like "RESTful" or "big data".

History navigation, bookmarks, and reloading are all supported using any modern framework. I think this is a 2012 topic.

Some browser features are not used for a good reason. The Alert, Prompt, and Confirm popups for example block the whole browser -not just the current tab- because they're older than tabs.

On this project the maintainers have chosen not to adopt any post-2012 JS frameworks, citing poor stability. I think they made a sound decision, so I'm not interested in going down that road with them.

You raised a good point about alert dialogs and it helped me refine my thoughts. Sometimes it's actually worth it to "reinvent" browser features. I don't know anyone who thinks that alert dialogs are good UX. So "reinventing the wheel" doesn't work here because it's too broad.

I found the concept I was looking for, and it's called "perceived affordances" vs. "false affordances." A perceived affordance is any sort of intuitive, visual clue that a user can perform an action. For example, text that is blue and underlined lets a user know it is a link that can be clicked. A false affordance is a perceived affordance that is not real. For example, a back button that does not do the intuitive function of taking you one screen back is a false affordance.

"Reinventing the wheel"

v1: waste of client money. v2: government funded project

Reply on news.ycombinator.com