My point being, sure you can get a more secure `something` by making it more and more static, but you'll probably cripple it somehow.
It's simply a balance you have to find for your use case.
My point being, sure you can get a more secure `something` by making it more and more static, but you'll probably cripple it somehow.
It's simply a balance you have to find for your use case.
I think problem is that current dynamic websites are sort of crippled already. Right now even simple shopping app requires UI based on HTML + web. Not a chance to use command line, some automated devices etc... In future we might see radically simplified protocols/webservices for more universal access.
All of the web apps I make at work are all javascript in a page apps. But before I start doing any of that, I make a REST API. 100% of the interaction between javascript and the web server is REST.
There are many reasons for this, but a key one is that it allows easy command-line or programatic interaction. Much easier than with traditional, server generated web apps.
SPA + restful endpoints makes it easy to pick a library centric approach vs. a framework approach but it certainly does not preclude you from using a framework.
I guess people who disable javascript don't get to use your site...but I don't really care about that segment of the population.
Like, real castles?