Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

[LISP] [Web] Let's work on the new Lispweb! [Standard]

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-17 1:10

We're all sick of dealing with the verbosity of XML/SGML based languages, the inconsistency of CSS and the overall badness of Javashit. Transcompiling to any of these languages is just a half-assed try at sugarcoating a turd.

Post your ideas for syntax/semantic rules, document structure, protocols, rendering techniques or anything relevant to the topic.

Hopefully we will be able to create a basic clone of /prog/ using the newly designed languages. No need to work on retarded features like animations or ``single page applications'' because this project is aimed exclusively at EXPERT PROGRAMMERS.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-20 14:16

>>37
Why do we even need attributes?

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-20 17:07

Besides the use of HTML/XML/SexpCode, should the structure of a web document remain the same? I'm all for a step at a time and start writing a SexpCode parser. What should the extension of a SexpCode file be?

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-20 21:26

>>42
no it has to be completely different, since HTML is way way too complex

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-20 22:40

Dubz

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-20 23:38

>>42
.sex

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-20 23:39

>>42
should the structure of a web document remain the same
Absolutely not. Attribute-ridden shit is the last thing we want to achieve. Cleaning up the current structure and giving it more logical names (what the fuck is a span) is the whole point of this.

Also, centering anything shouldn't be a royal pain in the ass.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 0:02

One of the most important reasons for this is that it's impossible to write your own web browser today. That means the control is taken away from users and kept by companies that manage large software dev teams.

Everything about this has to be kept as simple as possible. Think about whether or not you could implement it in templeos (pretending it had a TCP stack).

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 2:21

Now that we've got a vague idea on a layout language, how do we format our lisppages?

Should the presentation be done entirely apart from the layout? Should we ban b, i, o, u? What about doing both in the same place? What are the pros and cons of using the current scheme?

If anyone is interested, this document explains very briefly how most web browsers work, including some stuff that isn't immediately obvious to the average progrider.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WYBNDHJnKmB6KAlm9Xfoz-cWvPNvNn-ig7CcC1hSWeQ/

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 2:50

https://docs.google.com/
FUCK OFF

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 3:07

>>48
http://www.htmldog.com/guides/css/intermediate/pseudoclasses/
This shit needs to die.

Why can't we have markup with conditional statements? Even TEX is better than this shit.

Name: >>50 2015-08-21 3:11

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Pseudo-classes
Meant to post this. It's better at highlighting the absurdity of this non-Turing complete shitshow.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 7:55

>>50,51
If I recall correctly this site uses that to make sage names turn red when you hover over them.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 9:25

One thousand css specifications are still better than one line of javascript.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 10:06

>>52,53
Why would you re-create HTML and CSS from scratch while keeping Javascript intact?

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 10:33

>>54
I don't know. Why would you? That's a nice rhetorical question. Ponder it while you check my dubs.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 12:45

Here's a good way to design a html/css replacement.

suppose you had some simple primitives for drawing and measuring text - what sorts of pages would be easy to create?

I think pages like this would be very easy: http://cr.yp.to/factorization.html - text with nice formatting, different sizes. but you just have text elements which take the height they need and wrap.

This would be a good start. I don't know how you would best buidl more complicated structures like tables and forms, but maybe we don't even need that.

One thing we do need is simplicity.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 13:27

http://gonmf.github.io/fwd/

This is my suggestion, it still lacks some things like user input, but I think it is a much more usable alternative to the HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript/Flash plugin combo that is the web today.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 13:44

>>57
Context-sensitive grammars are a pain, though the rest sounds good.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 13:57

>>58
a pain for whom?

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 16:54

>>59
For my ass.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 16:58

>>60 optimize your anii

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-21 21:24

>>57
Nice.

Name: http://gonmf.github.io/fwd/ 2015-08-22 16:23

It now specifies input and interactive functions.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-22 17:00

>>63
I don't agree with the specifics but this guy really gets it and I'm so happy to see that. Great stuff.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-22 18:14

>>64
Elaborate please.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-22 22:08

>>65
Check 'em please.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-23 11:46

>>57
Flash is only around for games. It's not a regular part of "the web today".

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-23 12:49

>>67
What about video players? Only Youtube uses HTML5.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-23 17:32

>>63
Here we see how we can inform the browser of the language being used in the text. An intelligent browser should have the ability to translate it to another language if it better fits the users needs.
What

Mind explaining how this is to be implemented?

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-23 22:38

>>69
I think Google chrome already offers to translate pages when they are not in the native tongue as set by the user. It would just make it easy to identify what pieces of text are translatable, and from which language, and what pieces of text should be kept in the original form.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-23 22:43

>>69
For instance imagine you have a website with French poetry translated to English side-by-side as is often seen in books.

It would make sense to indicate part of the text should not be automatically translated, while the other part should. Leaving it to the browser to detect the language of the entire document and try to translate everything is an inferior approach.

It might make sense to differentiate the language of a piece of text and whether it would make sense for it to be translated; however I didn't want to imply a browser would be forced not to translate something just because it was meant to be taken literally. It's a thin difference so I went with the simpler route.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 0:42

>>68
Funnyjunk and Newgrounds use HTML5.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 1:46

>>71
I don't want to be the pessimist retard here but how are you stopping anyone from doing {language Arabic שָׁלוֹם}?

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 10:06

>>68
HTML5 has huge usage in video. Plain webm files are also getting common.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 10:15

>>74
When people are presented with an easier and saner choice, they eventually migrate towards the saner choice. Maybe there is hope for the web after all.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 11:48

>>73
What do you mean, change text direction?

>>75
I'm not crazy enough to think the whole internet would migrate to something different, but hopefully some people and some fields might be directed to use this; just like some websites havelinked data versions and ontologies:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/technology/software-engineering/semantic-web

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 12:18

Yeah, what do you mean >>73-sama, your utf magic is not comprehensible by us mere mortals.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 14:05

HTML is good enough, it just cannot be used for applications.

recommendations:

* drop <form>, <input>, etc...
* drop CSS
* drop JS
* retain a usable document format.

As for 'apps': these should be delivered using VNC or NX technology.

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 15:06

HTML is good enough
<span class="nigger">kill
<span> yourself </span>
</span>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

Name: Anonymous 2015-08-24 15:14

>>77
I got you bro your dubs will always be checked

>>78
That's a terrible alternative because:
1. It can already be done (no one is forced to use any of those things) and they are not popular. Any attempt to use plain HTML would be just fighting using HTML+CSS+etc, which would meant a lot of people not even understanding the principles behind a document format for the user.
2. Not everything is an app either, why would I need an app if I just want for instance a small comment section?
3. HTML is objectively a poor document format. If you want non-interactive documents with a strictly defined look then you might as well use LaTeX.
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode + RSS -