On Friday, 19 June 2015 at 15:52:09 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
across sites. That does nothing to integrate the old
page/hyperlink model of the web with the new dynamic HTML5
model, but as Nick said, simply piles more of the dynamic
stuff on top.
Actually, it does, as the logic is moved more into elements.
Like Angular and Polymer.
I probably haven't been clear enough about what I mean. The
original model for the web was a bunch of hyperlinked
pages/documents. But that model increasingly breaks down as you
make the page more dynamic. What are you linking to anymore: a
page, an app, or a widget within the app? Now you have to freeze
all state within an app then link to it, like the generated links
on Google Maps or when you save a document in Word.
As the browser tries to mesh these two worlds, the old-fashioned
static hyperlinked pages and the new dynamic widgets of AJAX and
HTML5, rifts crop up. The recent web components efforts you
highlight do not address this at all, they merely make it easier
to build more dynamic webapps. But in doing so, they actually
bring the problems I'm talking about more to the fore.
That actually makes some sense for a document format, which is
what HTML originally was. It makes no sense for a vector
graphics format like SVG, where efficiency is key.
I'd think the opposite, that binary format makes sense for PDF
since it is an enduser format, but it is easier to debug when
text so it is probably text for the same reasons as SVG.
My point was that text makes some sense for the layout of a
document format, but efficiency is key in vector graphics, so you
always want to go binary there.
For SVG I want flexibility and transparency. It would be
counterproductive if it was not in XML. Editing would be
horrible. And yes, I edit SVG by hand, PDF too. I don't think
I've ever used SVG or built PDF generators without manually
editing either format as raw text.
Then have SVG be an authoring format that is subsequently
"compiled" down to an efficient binary encoding for distribution.
There is _zero_ reason for text SVG to be the actual end-user
format. I bet a lot of the bloat issues that Wyatt pointed out
are exactly because of this.
Because writing it once in HTML/CSS/JS takes you much longer
than writing it in Java, while being less responsive, then you
Dunno about less responsive. Java apps often feel more sluggish
than well written web apps. Java is probably better for larger
programs, but most programs aren't large. Many programs are
just simple interfaces to online databases.
On mobile devices, I've been hit by plenty of sluggishness from
both, just more so in the browser.
On Saturday, 20 June 2015 at 15:21:29 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
High DPI settings screw up native UI too if it's not
pixel-precise, and ignoring user preferences is infraction, I'm
afraid. And this is where web actually shines: it's designed to
adapt gracefully to any user settings. Well, of course when
site design strays from how web was designed to work, it runs
into problems, that should be obvious.
The highest-DPI devices I use nowadays are mobile devices and, in
my experience, websites are the ones who most often get it wrong.
That's usually related to tiny text, but that affects the
overall layout too.
I didn't really try to write java, but my impression is that
java usually requires huge amounts of boilerplate code, while
web is usually succinct.
I don't find HTML/CSS/JS succinct or easy to get right, the
latter of which writing a Java/Android UI is at least better at.
Of course, the Android devs had to go muff that up by adding XML
into the mix.
Dunno, I don't see there losses, maybe because they only happen
on mobile. Yeah, you said nothing about how this is related to
desktop as if it doesn't exist.
Pretty soon it won't. :) There are an estimated 2.5 billion
smartphone users:
http://www.asymco.com/2014/04/07/postmodern-computing/
The highest estimates of desktop and laptop users I've seen don't
crack 2 billion. That means desktops are already a minority
platform. All the major mobile vendors are working on
multi-window implementations which will soon allow you to plug
your mobile device into a dock that connects to a
monitor/keyboard/trackpad on your desk and run your mobile apps
in a similar way to the desktop: Apple's just-announced
multi-window feature to go along with their coming iPad Pro,
Google's in-development multi-window implementation that has been
found in the Android M build, and Microsoft's recently announced
Continuum for mobile devices, that lets you plug your Windows
Phone into a monitor and use Office with a desktop UI.
What this means is that people will soon be using their mobile
devices for almost everything and desktop computers are
effectively dead. :) Now, workstations were killed off by PCs and
they still sell a couple million worldwide. Similarly, there
will always be a niche for PCs and mainframes. It's just a small
niche.
