Comment by TravisPeacock

Comment by TravisPeacock 11 days ago

Do you have a thought on how to do the edit page without JS? I am with you I wanted to make it no js, then added a little here and there. I couldn't think of a way to allow someone to add unlimited links in a way that was clean and fast without JS. I guess I could detect if you're not allowing JS and then have an input field so you can select how many you want to have and then pass that as a GET variable.

It's added to the roadmap to investigate more.

Jorge1o1 11 days ago

Well, theoretically you could make your current "Add Link" button and your current "Remove" button just trigger a server-side request and then refresh the page.

maybe some combination of the <noscript> tag and then if so wrapping the buttons in <form> and making the buttons submit those forms?

Reply View 0 replies

dccoolgai 11 days ago

I love this! Great work! Just an idea here, since you already have a form with the `action` set up, you could do some kind of `noscript` section with like 10 preset `input` elements, where the "n+1"th input appears when strings are present for the "nth" ones (using :has or something like that... the internet is lousy with examples of how to do this kind of thing). To go really hardcore "progenhance" you could even wrap that all in a @supports CSS rule. (So "if you don't want to use CSS, here's all 10 inputs. Have fun, sailor.")

Reply View 6 replies

clan 11 days ago

Good idea. I get it. But I do not find it "clean" as Travis states.
Have a quick turn around time on the form. Let it be a server problem. Have a hidden field on the form set to "nojs". Let javascript set this to "js".
The server can then decide if this is a bulk edit or not. It can then decide it will batch approvals into one mail or wait a little longer.
Then you can optimize on what you find most clean and/or works best.
Have one form field for easy entry and turn around. Ten as you suggest? But what is the optimum number? 3? 20? And is it "clean" to have 20 form fields which the javascript version then will roll back into one.
So the non-javascript version will never be better. Somethings gotta give. But submitting a form can be superfast. And the page refresh will be super fast. Such is life without javascript.
And now I realize that I made an implied server optimization: Mail approval should in my mind be batched and dampened. 10 seconds might be enough.As long as new inpit is coming we can postpone approval anyway as the user is busy. Findong the correct number is the magic trick. Not too fast. Not too slow.

Reply View | 5 replies
- TravisPeacock 11 days ago
  
  Maybe if you're not going to use js then a text area that needs each entry to be a newline link,text. If the form submitted has text there it will process it. You don't get validation but that's part of what you give up not using js.
  What's the point of delayed email sending? (Lol tried to find a way to ask that which sounds genuine, but they all read as annoyed me)
  
  Reply View | 4 replies
  
  fragmede 11 days ago
  
  You batch the emails so users get one email with multiple messages inside it, instead of spamming their inbox with 1-per mail.
  
  Reply View | 3 replies

clan 11 days ago

Your heart is the right place but your logic is upside down! :-)

The easy way to make it simple is do it as a form and then embellish it with javascript. Maybe counter intuitive but still. Let the javascript mangle the form so it does not look like a form and Bob is your uncle. By always using that pattern you easily end up with good usability and accessibility.

The same as with CSS. Make good content with nice semantic HTML. Then go crazy with super cool CSS.

But I am an old fart who hates Tailwind with a vengance. But I do acknowledge it get work done and many think it is great. So I will sulk in the corner and say that they are doing it wrong. Old man yelling at clouds.

Next: REST is great but misunderstood. I do not miss SOAP.

But know this: I love your sentiment and attitude. Nice job! Grumble ;-)

Reply View 0 replies