• Thinker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I think the point is that they don’t want to have to use a full JS framework (which is what HTMX is) for this behavior.

    And this is where HTMX fits in. It’s an elegant and powerful solution to the front-end/back-end split, allowing more of the control logic to operate on the back-end while dynamically loading HTML into their respective places on the front-end.

    But for a tech-luddite like me, this was still a bit too much. All I really want to do is swap page fragments using something like AJAX while sticking to semantically correct HTML.

    EDIT: Put another way, if you look at HTMX’s "motivation"s:

    motivation

    • Why should only <a> & <form> be able to make HTTP requests?
    • Why should only click & submit events trigger them?
    • Why should only GET & POST methods be available?
    • Why should you only be able to replace the entire screen?

    By removing these constraints, htmx completes HTML as a hypertext

    It seems the author only cares about the final bullet, and thinks the first three are reasonable/acceptable limitations.

    • Fal@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I see, I guess I get the point they’re making. We can do iframe reloads based on clicks without javascript, why not div reloads. I think framing it as a way of doing this without javascript rather than without a framework would be clearer and a better argument