Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by genericid 2880 days ago
Not everything is a chat application. But even a chat application can and should partially work without an internet connection: Reading old messages and composing new ones can work offline.
1 comments

That has nothing to do with Javascript. If you use canonical, cacheable URIs for your requests, my method above works fine.

In my day job, I'm working on a CRM and sales system that is 100% web based and does work offline and is even offline-first (I love you Germany, but your mobile network sucks).

There may be many other problems with it but offline is mostly a solved problem in the web world.

Quick experiment: In a new Firefox profile, I opened a couple of websites [1]. Then I went offline and tried to load them again. Every time I just got the default "server not found" page of Firefox.

"Offline" is no more solved "not hijacking scrolling", "linkable URLs" and "not re-inventing <a href> badly".

[1]https://news.ycombinator.com/, https://www.google.com/, https://en.wikipedia.org, https://www.reddit.com/, https://www.nytimes.com

Did you try right clicking and choosing "Save as..."?

As I said before, it's a 5-minute thing to get started with service-workers. Web-sites can use that and then you don't even need to save. There is this great offline library, fellow developers! Use it! What other platform gives you such easy-to-use offline capabilities?

> "not hijacking scrolling", "linkable URLs" and "not re-inventing <a href> badly"

You are dealing with a Turing-complete language here. Navigation situation is still way better than the applets.

What is the alternative you are supporting instead the current situation?

> As I said before, it's a 5-minute thing to get started with service-workers. Web-sites can use that and then you don't even need to save.

I don't care if websites can use that if they don't.

> You are dealing with a Turing-complete language here.

That's the fucking problem.

> What is the alternative you are supporting instead the current situation?

Using a proper application platform instead of a pile of hacks on top of the web. Without that pile of hacks, the web would actually be usable because publishers would not be able to break the UX.

> I don't care if websites can use that if they don't.

It's new, and you can still save pages. Browsers will do their best to include all resources they depend as well.

> Using a proper application platform instead

Which one? Is there any cross-platform one with consistent design and UX? I don't think so.

> It's new, and you can still save pages

No, I can't. That does not work reliably.

> Browsers will do their best

In other words, they will fail.

> Which one? Is there any cross-platform one with consistent design and UX? I don't think so.

Frankly, even Electron applications are better than making web pages that behave incorrectly.