i absolutely hate how the modern web just fails to load if one has javascript turned off. i, as a user, should be able to switch off javascript and have the site work exactly as it does with javascript turned on. it’s not a hard concept, people.

but you ask candidates to explain “graceful degradation” and they’ll sit and look at you with a blank stare.

  • Lena@gregtech.eu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Fair, some websites do need JavaScript though. Such as webapps. Could they be server-side rendered?

    • candyman337@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Depending on the web app, the real solution would be a much more simplified JavaScript free version

    • 6nk06@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      SSR is a thing and could be used to render most content remotely without pissing off readers.

      • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 hours ago

        They know ssr is a thing which is why they used that term. But ssr produces a static page or static component, where webapps often require some level of interactivity for their basic functionality, such as reacting to server events. They’re asking if that can be achieved with ssr