Didn't listen to the audio. Just did now. Seems like you had a bunch of points there ... but I'm not sure if my position would be any different. If I was building myspace (or a blogging platform) I'd probably still offer people the ability to write in haml and allow them to fall back to html if they couldn't be bothered learning haml (which is how it works in ruby/rails now). HAML, like markdown, is a superset of html. Maybe the trouble is with the tile of presentation? Maybe it should have been "Why optional abstraction layers implemented as supersets of their target output formats suck in a world where more people are familiar with original output format. And not many people write the output format properly anyway. And the output format is a standard and new stuff is happening in that standard." or simply "On HAML & HTML"
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Ben Schwarz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Myles, did you listen to the audio? > I had a bit of feed back this morning from people who had not, I > believe this is probably why (I think) you missed the "point" of my > presentation? > > Thanks for the insight of how your brain works :) I always knew it was > a wild and scary place. > > On Jun 29, 4:25 pm, Myles Byrne <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Ben Schwarz <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > My slides (with audio, thanks to Josh Basset!) are onlinehttp:// > www.slideshare.net/benschwarz/why-haml-sucks-or-why-you-should... > > > > Awesome. Is your next preso on "Why Ruby Sucks or Why You Should Think > > Before Choosing Ruby for Your Next Project". Honestly people should just > > learn to write better PHP. > > > > Seriously though, here's how I think about HAML (and language quality in > > general): If you randomly pick a line (or even a short string) from a > file, > > what are the chances that piece will contain a *contextually relevant* > chunk > > of information and not just some boilerplate that's there to help the > > computer process the data. > > > > There's something that's built into our psychology that tends to > associate a > > good visual helping of metadata with "work" and "quality". This story > came > > up on hackernews recently[1] that's kind of cheesy but illustrates the > point > > well. I know the feeling, I'm guilty of this myself. For the longest time > > typing this: > > > > <style type="text/css"></style> > > > > Just Felt Right. > > > > The part of my brain that appreciates "correctness" just overruled the > part > > that said "there's only on style language the browser actually > understands > > and it's going to be like that for a very long time and even when it's > not > > that new style language will probably still have a mime-type with a > > preceding 'text/' ... and even when we're embedding a fancy new style > > language that is not text (not sure what this would even look like, > base64?) > > then the browser will probably still try to detect CSS first because it > > makes logical sense to do so". > > > > You have to conquer this part of brain, the part that sees an XML > document > > that is 90% tags and thinks "I wonder if this validates" rather than > > "Where's the signal". Progress depends on it. HAML is the right > direction. > > > > -- Myles > > > > [1]http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=677655 > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
