in reply to Re^3: Technobabble (was: Re: Adding recognition of Gemini to URI.pm?)
in thread Adding recognition of Gemini to URI.pm?

Saying so, this has been tried for decades, and commercial interests always found ways to circumvent it.

Not only commercial interest. I'm an open source dev and i do it too. "Progressive enhancements" are anything but. It makes development of a website a pain, limits what you can achieve with the resources available and makes the end product worse for 99% of the users. Yes, i'm using (session) cookies. Yes, i am using JavaScript. It's part of the HTML standard, and if your browser vendor is unable or unwilling to integrate one of the many open source implementations, that is not my problem.

And yes, there are text-based browsers that support JS, like browsh...

PerlMonks XP is useless? Not anymore: XPD - Do more with your PerlMonks XP
Also check out my sisters artwork and my weekly webcomics
  • Comment on Re^4: Technobabble (was: Re: Adding recognition of Gemini to URI.pm?)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Technobabble (was: Re: Adding recognition of Gemini to URI.pm?)
by LanX (Saint) on Oct 15, 2024 at 10:40 UTC
    Actually this site is kind of an example of progressive enhancement.

    Users can add CSS and JS, tobyink once even piggy backed a "modern" interface using bootstrap.js

    Problem is, I tried using it with lynx and the result wasn't optimal... :)

    But again, if people prefer the Gemini or progressive enhancement approach, why should we interfere?

    Open source baby...;)

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    see Wikisyntax for the Monastery