kentonv changed the topic of #sandstorm to: Welcome to #sandstorm: home of all things sandstorm.io. Say hi! | Have a question but no one is here? Try asking in the discussion group: https://groups.google.com/group/sandstorm-dev
frigginglorious has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<isd>
It's always a little jarring when I come across a comment in our source code that says TODO(soon) or TODO(now) that's clearly been there for years
frigginglorious has joined #sandstorm
frigginglorious has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
nicoo has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
nicoo has joined #sandstorm
<strugee>
abliss: I don't really know why but if I had to guess it's because local storage is incredibly bad for perf
<strugee>
at least IIRC
<strugee>
actually
<strugee>
I'm not sure. I seem to recall some web platform spec person saying so, but now I can't find the reference
<strugee>
nvm :P
vertigo_38 has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
vertigo_38 has joined #sandstorm
vertigo_38 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
vertigo_38 has joined #sandstorm
<CcxWrk>
JacobWeisz[m]: You probably want the per-instance end-to-end encryption keys fairly persistent. Otherwise cross-device verification becomes unbearable hassle.
<CcxWrk>
Granted, that might be handled by different API than local storage in browsers.
vertigo_38 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
vertigo_38 has joined #sandstorm
vertigo_38 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
vertigo_38 has joined #sandstorm
vertigo_38 has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
frigginglorious has joined #sandstorm
frigginglorious1 has joined #sandstorm
frigginglorious has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
frigginglorious1 is now known as frigginglorious
<isd>
I wish browsers' default styling was more reasonable. Like, most of what I build doesn't really have any special needs, and I'm not super keen on "branding" things, but the way things look if you just don't do anything is less than great.
<isd>
It's kind of silly that a page that's not at all out of the ordinary has to have styles actively developed for it.
<abliss>
any user who doesn't like the default presentation is free to customize their user agent.
<isd>
I'm not even sure how to do that in most modern browsers?
<JacobWeisz[m]>
Shady browser extensions will do it for you.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
At risk to your security.
<isd>
Also sane defaults are a good thing, and there are a few things that are kinda off about the default styles. There really should be a max width for sections of long form text; readability drops off rapidly past 70-80 chars.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
At least for Sandstorm apps I think we can present some default styling in the future that are easy to drop in and use server-provided assets.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
But yeah, I recall Microsoft recently redid a bunch of Chrome's UI elements like date pickers and stuff that Google accepted because theirs hadn't been updated since the dawn of time.
<isd>
The fact that <nav> doesn't do anything style wise is also dumb.
<isd>
Like, the semantics of that element do nothing for the average browser user.
<isd>
So you have to style it yourself for it to not be super awkward.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
A lot of HTML5 elements have nothing because the default assumption for HTML5 is CSS.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
Which is sad. When I write HTML, I tend to defiantly use deprecated elements like <b> and <font> because they're simple and they work.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
And as of yet, all browsers still respect them.
<isd>
I don't expect that will change anytime soon. But does it trigger quirks mode? I'm a little fuzzy on that.
<isd>
mozilla says <!doctype html> is sufficient to enable standards mode.
<isd>
fwiw, I'm more or less fine with the default choices of fonts.
<isd>
Re: <b> (and <i> and friends), I think they retconned the semantics of those to be less about styling.
<isd>
Though obviously the default rendering is the same.
<isd>
I guess this is also why stuff like bootstrap exists, but that's so heavyweight. And the lightweight alternatives I've found don't tend to deal with stuff like my <nav> complaint
<isd>
A lot of the complexity comes from having to build their own grid layout engines, which isn't needed anymore since browsers support css grid layout nowadays.
<isd>
Only took us 30 years.
<isd>
This is one thing that's _way_ nicer about desktop UI development (or even mobile...): no need to invent what the widgets look like.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
That's not bad, and it defaults to using system fonts you're likely to have instead of Google Fonts, which is a rare and good choice.
<isd>
Trying it out on a page though, it's hard to spot the bounaries between nav links.
<isd>
But I do like it overall.
<JacobWeisz[m]>
I linked it on our own font related issue, because I think it'd be good to model something like it if we are offering fonts and styles for apps to use someday.
<abliss>
fwiw I somewhat prefer the un-styled experience over that "writ" one. No accounting for taste.
<abliss>
I especially resent how everyone in the world seems to think that line-height should be smaller than the default, so that highlighting multiple consecutive lines causes an ugly overlap in the highlight.
<abliss>
and how everyone wants to limit the max-width to about half my screen width, so that i have to waste tons of pixels on whitespace.
<isd>
It has good and bad points. I like the default fonts better, and I think the links don't jump out from the text as much as they should. But it limits the line width to something sensible, and most of the elements are more reasonable than their defaults.