dmethvin

> If CSS was designed the way it is just to satisfy the constraints of 1996, then maybe that gives us permission 20 years later to do things a little differently.

Yeah, just like we can choose which side of the road to drive on or pick any arbitrary character encoding for an 8-bit byte.

This has a lot of really serious implications. I built a form for a charity that allowed users to buy a subscription but include an additional donation amount. Chrome was sometimes filling that field with the two-digit year. The charity got a lot of complaints and it ruined the trust relationship with the donors who didn't understand what was happening and thought it was intentional.

AMP is just a set of conventions and limitations that, when followed, make for a fast site. Anyone can make a fast site if they follow similar rules. Most sites don't do that because either the developers want to use something that's "nicer" to code but a lot bigger, or because the marketing department insists on loading 12 different tracking and analytics progams--when they probably only use one or two.

Yes, things are changing rapidly everywhere on the stack, but it seems that with front-end dev the same two things are left behind with each generation: performance and accessibility.

Each time we get close to making performant and accessible web sites easy for mortals to develop, some major disruption in the force occurs and well-crafted solutions no longer work in the new environment. So people reinvent them, poorly, and it takes another four or five years before things catch up.

I think many designers and developers prioritize their own needs or preferences and fail to advocate for what users really want. No user wants a web site or app to take 10 seconds to load on their phone, yet most do. Users don't care if your app is written in React, Angular, or served from a WordPress site. They just want to be able to use it.

I wasn't able to find any working examples from the homepage, even with the updated link. Can you link directly to a demo page or two that uses the library, rather than a Github repo with code that uses the library?

I don't think they want control over the browser market, just the browser users on Windows. People are less likely to ditch Edge if it is more compatible with the way Chrome and Safari work (including the ability to run Chrome extensions). That means they have more visibility and control over those users.

It's important to express the underlying reasoning for the policy: things with similar size and speed can be together, dissimilar things should be separated. Cars and bikes/scooters are not the same, and streets need to separate them via dedicated lanes. If not, those users are going to choose sidewalks as the lesser of two dangers.

Quite often you have to manually do the task at least once to determine how to automate it. That tells you your upper bound on how much time can be saved.

If for example it only took 15 minutes of manual work it's highly unlikely that the payback of automation would occur any time soon. That's especially true because the 2nd or 3rd time there may be different special cases and you'd have to go back and change your automation.

I completely agree that you can do a lot with jQuery or even plain DOM and JS. It's often the right way to go when there's already back-end structure like Wordpress, Drupal, or ASP.NET and you just need simple things like form validation.

The benefit that frameworks offer is exactly that structure that jQuery doesn't provide (and was never designed to provide). A long-lived SPA needs good structure. If you aren't good at understanding how to create it yourself a framework can save a LOT of work.

That would cost Apple a lot if those people had Apple Care. Better for Apple if the minority people who perceive a problem come in and ask for a replacement/