Spyke
Fal
yiffit.net

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.

6
Thinkerreply
lemmy.world

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.

4
Falreply
yiffit.net

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

0
Lmaydevreply
programming.dev

So here's what I propose (and what I've built as a small demo below):

They're suggesting it should be part of browser behaviour. They couldn't demonstrate it without JS.

1

Yeah, I missed the part where they wanted it to be built into the browser

-1

You reached the end

Semantic AJAX-HTML | Spyke