EHTML Docs
e-html.org
e-html.org
Around the same time I had a pocket pc that I would take to vacations. It had a limited mobile IE, but no code or raw text editor, and I didn’t know how to get one. So I would code in JS 1.5 using pocket Word, then as soon as I got back home from holidays I would use ActiveSync to retrieve the word docs to my pc, convert them to HTML, and then sync them back to my pocket pc for use in pocket IE.
Made so many fun apps this (clunky) way. I also completely forgot about this until I saw your comment, thanks for triggering this trip down memory lane and apologies for the massive OT.
Htmx is all about embracing hypermedia and its only goal is to enhance the shameful shortcomings of html. See also the hypermedia.systems book.
E-html seems to be more about how can I do client side rendering without pulling in something huge like react, vue or whatever thing you fancy.
Just my POV as a non web dev that is not affiliated with any of these projects.
[0] https://github.com/Guseyn/EHTML/blob/77d14539d1a9b39785db6f3...
Wait isn’t this what htmx is about too?
Seriously what’s the fundamental difference between them?
Sounds like an impossible task using HTML alone.
Happy to see competition in the world of "minimal JS" frameworks. Have you done a comparison with Turbo/Stimulus from DHH and company?
Setting a good example & being a good steward of the net is something docs like these could/should provide; that is to say, the author could make the static parts static & offer a <noscript> with a brief description of the interactivity the user might be missing. The docs are likely coming from dog-fooding the library, but came at the cost of making static content maximally available & providing a noscript message.
For bonus marks, inline all the subresources (SVG, CSS and utils.js) and strip dead styles, and you can probably squeeze the entire thing into the 14KB TCP slow start window (compressed), so that it would have completely loaded for me in about 430ms at most (though it should have been closer to 200ms) instead of 1.7s, and with no reflow due to the logo not having been given dimensions.