[antiframe]

I agree that basic styling and in-line images add something, but I like how Gemini strips so much faff out that the prose and links must stand strongly on their own.

I've taken to writing my markdown and other documetns simiarly. Cory Doctorow does something similar.

https://pluralistic.net/2023/12/20/em-oh-you-ess-ee/#sexytim...

We don't need Gemini. We can get the feeling of the Smol Web by just choosing an effective subset of the features of HTML.

[lproven]

Entirely this.

I feel that if there were some way of promoting a Javascript-free web, everything the world needs is already there in all modern browsers.

I suspect that between HTML5, and indeed XHTML, and CSS and all the many modern image formats and so on, everything important that almost any site needs could be done using these tools and no JS at all.

And the result could also be interpreted and rendered successfully by much smaller simpler browsers, along the lines of Netsurf and Dillo, which are 10% of the size of a full dynamic-content browser or less.

The question is how.

A contest? Make the richest website you can that uses no Javascript, Typescript or anything else, and win a prize as well as promotion?

[giantrobot]

I don't think a contest is needed. Just a desire to participate in the "Smol Web". Back in the day we had the "best viewed in any browser" badge indicating a page worked fine in IE and Navigator and probably also lynx. Personally I hate making web pages that don't work in Dillo or lynx.

[lproven]

I think, as per my comment above, you're misinterpreting me too.

I am not trying to create a reason to make script-free websites. I think they are their own justification.

I am trying to propose a method for making them visible and showing webdevs what can be done and why it's worth trying.

[sircastor]

I think a contest would be antithetical to the idea being circled here. The early web (to me) was filled with content front people who put out there because they wanted to share. Put your page up because here’s something you think is cool. I feel like it loses something with a contest.

[lproven]

I think you misinterpret my motivation here.

What I want is less use of Javascript and related scripting languages across the web. I'd like more websites that don't need it.

I am merely proposing a mechanism for getting people to explore what can be done without it, and how it might in fact be easier, more fun, and more maintainable.

[PurpleRamen]

> I like how Gemini strips so much faff out that the prose and links must stand strongly on their own.

I don't think that's working at all. Their website is so unapproachable bad, that it fails in selling me reasons why I should even care about this or read further. Letting something standing on its own only really works well if you have a small amount to deliver. Any slightly lengthy text will just bury you in a desert of letters.

[ertian]

> Any slightly lengthy text will just bury you in a desert of letters.

So what do you make of books, then?

I don't think people "keep trying to make Gemini happen" in the sense that you mean. They're not aiming to replace the web. They've got a cozy little community that likes the 'smol', text-based web. And while 90% of people might think they're crazy, there are others out there who would like it too if only they knew it existed. Posts like this make the community a few individuals larger. I think that's the goal.

[PurpleRamen]

> So what do you make of books, then?

This webpage is not a book. It has a different purpose. With a book, I know what it contains, where it's leading to, usually they have an abstract for this.

I have nothing against Gemini and the people in general, I'm just saying the limitation is not working well for every type of text. Pictures and a bit more structure would be useful for the boring informative texts.

[antiframe]

Webpages aren't as monocultural as books, though. There are webpages that have interactive 3D models (which physical books can't). There are webpages that are basically books though. Some webpages will port well to gemtext, some will not. The purpose isn't to replace HTML. The purpose is to make long-form uninterrupted text a first-class citizen by forcing other elements to be second-class citizens.

[PurpleRamen]

> Webpages aren't as monocultural as books, though.

Depends on the definition of Webpage and book.

> There are webpages that have interactive 3D models (which physical books can't).

Pop-up-Books?

[troupo]

> So what do you make of books, then?

Have you ... seen books? You can't compare a medium as varied as books to a purposefully limited and primitive medium of Gemini.

[II2II]

> Any slightly lengthy text will just bury you in a desert of letters.

Is this a bad thing?

Books are a "desert of letters", with little to break the text up outside of chapters, sections, and paragraphs. If you broaden the scope a bit, you can added illustrations and photos. People have been reading books for generations. While many books do break that mould, many books continue to follow that tradition.

[PurpleRamen]

> Is this a bad thing?

Depends on the purpose. For a Webpage, which is a collection of short texts, to sell you on something, it is bad.

> Books are a "desert of letters"

Depends on the book. A phone book would be a desert of letters, I don't think many would enjoy reading them. Something like a novel, would be a forest of chapters, full of trees with letters arranged in a meaningful way, leading you on a road toward a goal. But a webpage is not a novel, it has an informative purpose, and is full of little small texts of equal value.

[skydhash]

I use a rss client which has a content view, and it's barely different than what gemini offers. I also read plenty of epubs and while inline images are possibles, it's often looks really bad. I think there's a value on prioritizing content over forms. Some contents won't fit to these restrictions and that's ok. It's not like it's a web replacement, just an alternative whose restrictions create some kind of exclusivity.

[troupo]

Have you actually seen books? While typographic traditions did go down the drain in the recent decades, it's still hard to find a domain as varied as books.

Even the most boring books often have things that Gemini purposefully omits: from styling to inline illustrations to diagrams to insets, asides, footnotes, tables of content, just tables, typographic marks etc. etc. etc.

[giantrobot]

> Books are a "desert of letters", with little to break the text up outside of chapters, sections, and paragraphs.

You're forgetting pages. The fact pages physically limit the visual bounds of all the letters helps people read them. The words from page 6 aren't going to come into view while you're reading page 4 but scrolled down a little too far.

[Gualdrapo]

Not sure if going back to 2008 or so pre-HTML5 will prevent people from injecting kilobyes and megabytes of JS libraries or nesting dozens of divs because reasons.