I opened this expecting the normal grungy tirade of intolerance & an general small & petty disdain for JavaScript. But there was the authors name and I knew this would be something different and higher class! And how!
I feel like the essence of this page needs some kind of rallying flag, some moniker. "Web first SPAs" or "browsing-compatible SPAs," something that can be made recognizable where the web dev tech hipsters can start pressuring each other & companies into doing the right things and not letting their SPAs break the web! This should be critical & visible drive in all web architecture, but its not notable as it's own thing, only seen in the absence of normal good functioning; having a good name to rally around & hype up in the noosphere feels needed.
> Maybe your single page app is different, but the ones that I know break most of my browser’s features, such as the back and forward buttons, page refresh, bookmarking, sending a link, or opening a link in a new window or tab. They offer no way to link to something that I look at. (Oh, I know there are exceptions to this rule, but they typically require effort — a lot more than many developers are prepared to invest).
> My main beef with single page apps, or SPAs for short, is that they’re not "on the web".
I do see a decent amount of reasonably well built apps, albeit most handle one or two pieces not perfectly. But there's also plenty of dark world dark pattern apps where things you click on aren't links.
(Subrant: this is also one of the things that drives me the most up the wall about PWAs. PWAs throw away most of the best parts of the web! Urls are quasi invisible, there's no tabs (unless the app builder specifically builds around Tabbed Application Mode), there's no forward/back buttons, nor bookmarks. PWAs ironically are as regressively anti-web as it possibly can come! They happen to be built with web technology, but obfuscate all web faculties the user might have. Piss on you PWAs, you are trash.)
I feel like the essence of this page needs some kind of rallying flag, some moniker. "Web first SPAs" or "browsing-compatible SPAs," something that can be made recognizable where the web dev tech hipsters can start pressuring each other & companies into doing the right things and not letting their SPAs break the web! This should be critical & visible drive in all web architecture, but its not notable as it's own thing, only seen in the absence of normal good functioning; having a good name to rally around & hype up in the noosphere feels needed.
> Maybe your single page app is different, but the ones that I know break most of my browser’s features, such as the back and forward buttons, page refresh, bookmarking, sending a link, or opening a link in a new window or tab. They offer no way to link to something that I look at. (Oh, I know there are exceptions to this rule, but they typically require effort — a lot more than many developers are prepared to invest).
> My main beef with single page apps, or SPAs for short, is that they’re not "on the web".
I do see a decent amount of reasonably well built apps, albeit most handle one or two pieces not perfectly. But there's also plenty of dark world dark pattern apps where things you click on aren't links.
(Subrant: this is also one of the things that drives me the most up the wall about PWAs. PWAs throw away most of the best parts of the web! Urls are quasi invisible, there's no tabs (unless the app builder specifically builds around Tabbed Application Mode), there's no forward/back buttons, nor bookmarks. PWAs ironically are as regressively anti-web as it possibly can come! They happen to be built with web technology, but obfuscate all web faculties the user might have. Piss on you PWAs, you are trash.)