> doesn't seem to be any particular reason to
require JS for basic functionality on a documentation site.)

Js is widely used these days. E.g., ReadTheDocs use Js [1].

Users without Js in the browser may be redirected to a static html version
of the website.

This version uses the material design [2] concept. CSS - although minimal -
came with the library which allowed for faster coding time, focusing on the
content and functionality.

For someone with basic React knowledge the website is easy to maintain.

SPA arch allows for faster navigation between the pages. Client side
rendering frees up the server.

The content largely follows the content from the existing website, with an
attempt at improving content organisation and navigation.

Does rendering by search robots need to be verified or may we take it as
most likely working?


[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_Design
cabal-devel mailing list

Reply via email to