A proposed addition to the HTML spec.
  • Fal@yiffit.netEnglish
    01·
    8 months ago

    I’m confused. This is exactly what https://htmx.org/attributes/hx-target/ is for since they’re already using htmx. This doesn’t make sense to add to the html spec unless ajax requests themselves are added such that browsers will do this automatically. Which I don’t think anyone wants.

    • Thinker@lemmy.world
      0·
      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.netEnglish
        01·
        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