Comment by mirkodrummer 4 days ago
Nice job! If only HTML had a serious templating system(no the template tag isn’t enough) that could be used without JavaScript, we won’t need any 3rd party system for assembling static sites. For example a mechanism for including partials with the <link> tag and refer them inside a <template> or directly into current html
One modern approach would be Caddy Server's templates, using Golang templating:
https://caddyserver.com/docs/modules/http.handlers.templates
The "include" function should do the job:
{{include "path/to/file.html"}}
httpd, nginx, a number of other servers support SSI
https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_ssi_module.html
Caddy chose not to, I guess?
https://caddy.community/t/caddy-update-on-ssi-server-side-in...
However, you could generate the static HTML easily and then publish it on those platforms, which is what many people do today (probably not often using SSI).
(Chiming in because other people replying to you kept on the "iframe-like" part of the argument)
Or serializing `<template>`s without needing JS. Like in lists (`<ol>`, `<ul>`, `<dl>`...). All in all `<template>`s are a nice thing to have, and I do use them a lot (like in my own portfolio), but it feels really lacking without JS.
I mentioned the object tag elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42706227
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/if...
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/po...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Side_Includes
Also, other than to satisfy a purist desire, why do you need this?
You can pre-render HTML quickly using a variety of template systems, and it would outperform what you are suggesting every time (from a client's perspective). I mean, think about the potential CSS resolution complexity, FOUC, etc.