undefined | Better HN

0 pointsecon4mo ago0 comments

I want clean urls, I don't want to update every page or dynamically stich them together for each page view, I don't want a server cache for dynamically stitched together static content.

These are expensive hacks to work around a lack of basic functionality.

It reminds me of one kid taking something from another and refusing to give it back because they are larger.

People make websites, they think they control what goes on on the page. This isn't unreasonable to think. In fact, everything should be made to preserve that idea.

A situation where they just can't change the page shouldn't exist. Abstracting it away or otherwise working around it doesn't make it any less wrong.

Some browsers have a magic key combo to force reload. I suppose the solution is to put up a modal and ask the user to "reinstall" the web page.

I have a lot of static pages with minimal html/css that thanks to lazy loading and caching consume very little bandwidth. The technology is truly wonderful, clicking around feels like a desktop application.

0 comments

mpeg4mo ago

I'm not entirely sure what your point is. You don't want the complexity of a server cache but you want "clean urls" – having a hash in a filename does not necessarily make it worse, in fact it's closer to a pure url since one of the principles of hypermedia is that each url should point to a unique resource

Urls like /v2/yourfile.js are probably closer to that philosophy. Or /[hash]/yourfile.js.

econOP4mo ago

Turns out we can both be wrong (specially me) fetch() does have various cache options.

econOP4mo ago

To needlessly elaborate a bit more.

Any query string may prevent caching in some browsers (not sure which or if they still do)

File paths in my view are to organize files hierarchically not for hash or version numbers.

Html like <img src="logo.jpg"> looks neat and sophisticated. You can teach it in 5 seconds. If more characters are needed I expect something huge in return. For example styling it individually or as a group of things is a huge benefit. lazy loading is also HUGE.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsecon4mo ago0 comments

I want clean urls, I don't want to update every page or dynamically stich them together for each page view, I don't want a server cache for dynamically stitched together static content.

These are expensive hacks to work around a lack of basic functionality.

It reminds me of one kid taking something from another and refusing to give it back because they are larger.

People make websites, they think they control what goes on on the page. This isn't unreasonable to think. In fact, everything should be made to preserve that idea.

A situation where they just can't change the page shouldn't exist. Abstracting it away or otherwise working around it doesn't make it any less wrong.

Some browsers have a magic key combo to force reload. I suppose the solution is to put up a modal and ask the user to "reinstall" the web page.

0 comments

mpeg4mo ago

Urls like /v2/yourfile.js are probably closer to that philosophy. Or /[hash]/yourfile.js.

econOP4mo ago

Turns out we can both be wrong (specially me) fetch() does have various cache options.

econOP4mo ago

To needlessly elaborate a bit more.

Any query string may prevent caching in some browsers (not sure which or if they still do)

File paths in my view are to organize files hierarchically not for hash or version numbers.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse