[jarek83]

I like how it looks. I don't like to see how badly it is crafted tech-wise - not optimized images by size and deferring, JS for things that work natively in the browser, bloat of tailwind instead of nice clean and modern CSS.

Knowing ruby I can tell that the relaxed approach to the website does not correspond with sophistication in the language itself. If I wouldn't know ruby, that would be a put off for me, thinking that if they don't want to convince me tech-wise by their site, it might be similarly annoying to deep-dive into the language.

[igravious]

> not optimized images by size and deferring, JS for things that work natively in the browser, bloat of tailwind instead of nice clean and modern CSS.

care to elaborate?

[jarek83]

Sure:

- images: none are visible above the fold - all should be lazy loaded (like it is done with all conference images) and the pragdave.jpeg one does not need to be that large;

- JS: navigation toggle, including chevron rotation can be done in CSS using :has combined with checkbox/radio input. Similarly for header-navigation and theme-toggle (here combined with cookie store). Then toc.js - seems like something easy to do in the backend. Hero-animation - I haven't looked much through it but seems like at least some parts can be done in CSS;

- CSS/tailwind - well it would probably take less typing to do it just in CSS, the site does not seem to be that much componentized to benefit from tailwind.

[MrJohz]

I would generally caution against doing toggles with CSS. While it can be done, it often has surprising effects, and can be difficult to make properly accessible (for example in the case of opening the navigation, I don't believe it's possible to set the correct aria tags to indicate that the toggle is a button that is showing/hiding another element on screen).

Instead, for a brochure site like this, I'd rather have the links just always visible, because this is the reference site for Ruby and I imagine a lot of people find them by searching "Ruby", coving l clicking the homepage, and scanning for the link to the docs/downloads/etc.

Alternatively, if the show/hide feature is really that important, right now I would (a) explore whether it can be done accessibly using the new invoker API, so you don't need JavaScript at all (with a JS fallback), or (b) just do it in JavaScript directly, but with an accessible default if the JS doesn't get loaded properly.

But yeah, the rest I largely agree with. There's a bunch of stuff here that would have been simpler, and arguably also easier, if they'd taken a slightly different approach.

[azangru]

> Similarly for header-navigation and theme-toggle

The theme toggle has three states. How do you model this with a checkbox?

[Elfener]

Why does a site even need a light/dark toggle, when you can just use prefers-color-scheme in CSS, and the user can select that in their browser settings?

(Also, technically, alternative stylesheets can be defined in HTML, except every browser except Firefox removed it: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/...)

[ameliaquining]

Because being able to switch from light to dark mode by clicking a single button is a useful feature, and while it would be nice if operating systems provided this out of the box, many (e.g., Windows) do not.

[azangru]

> Why does a site even need a light/dark toggle, when you can just use prefers-color-scheme in CSS, and the user can select that in their browser settings?

Good question, especially since the Ruby site already does this by default. Perhaps the argument is that one of the two color schemes may be designed so poorly that the user may want to manually switch to the other one.

[jasonlotito]

Because as a user, I want to change the light/dark of your site, not every set, and not my OS. If you don't have a toggle, you are making assumptions that aren't accurate.

[yawaramin]

I am assuming that if the user selected a specific brightness mode, they want sites they visit to respect that theme. Call me crazy but this seems like common sense.

[jarek83]

It could be done with :indeterminate state (so key in a cookie would be absent or removed when switching), but I'd probably would do it with radios instead

[SquareWheel]

Note that a checkbox's indeterminate state can only be set via JavaScript, so that lessens the elegance of a CSS-based approach.

I agree that using radios would be better. Or just prefers-color-scheme, which sidesteps the FOUT issue that often occurs when storing theme settings in localStorage.

[bmacho]

It's possible to have a 3-states CSS switch/slider that controls site theme. Google it or ask AI assistant.

[markdown]

The decorative underlines under the headings on the home page are embedded as content (<img> tags)!!!

Amateur hour.

[tyre]

I say this with love, compassion, grace, and all due respect: Who gives a shit?

[markdown]

It's a website for web devs. Web devs give a shit.

[ecshafer]

Ruby isn't necessarily for web devs. Ruby is popular for all sorts of business line applications. In Japan is popular for lower level programming. You can do game programming via something like Dragon Ruby. Sure its very popular for Rails, but you don't necessarily need to do web dev.