Documentation Website Direction

[bdjnk]

The main index.js contains the statement

// No hyperHTML is used here, because I've generated
// this site statically, and I want it to be readable
// by everyone, with or without JavaScript.

This is an admirable sentiment, but I have several counters.

First, important aspects of the site currently don't work without JavaScript.

One, the links to 'Examples' and 'Documentation' don't work because the modal never loads, resulting in a silent failure.

Two, the examples are entirely inaccessible since they never load. Ironically it appear to be using hyperHTML.

Second, it seems reasonable to assume that any browser of the target audience would support JavaScript.

Third, the documentation website could be a showcase of hyperHTML, which would be both convenient and convincing with regard to its viability.

---

As far as I can tell the website needs to be rearchitected and largely rewritten. I have experience in this regard.

I thought it wise to lay out my case before diving into any sort of restructuring.

Let me know what you think.

[WebReflection]

I think you are taking that comment too seriously and also as if it's written in every JS used in the site.

That comment is about the static pages it's used with, where the content is already available and all it does is simply make Bulma CSS components / styles work as expected.

There's no need for hyperHTML in the page as is because it's not generated server side via viperHTML, and the content does not need to be dynamically injected, it's already there.

But again, that comment is for that file only, and indeed there's no such comment in other files where of course I use hyperHTML, why wouldn't I?

TL;DR the site is as is to keep it simple. The documentation and/or examples is what I'd like to improve but I wouldn't waste time on the landing pages: these are just fine, IMO.

I close this because I don't think there any action to do here.

Regards