[bullen]

What is the advantage over just using this:

  var source = new EventSource('pull?name=one');
  source.onmessage = function (event) {
    document.getElementById('events').innerHTML += event.data;
  };

http://talk.rupy.se/event.html

> If you need bi-directional communication, then you should consider using WebSockets instead.

Or you just do a HTTP request?

[adontz]

HTMX can do much more than just innerHTML swap.

https://htmx.org/attributes/hx-swap/ https://htmx.org/attributes/hx-swap-oob/ https://htmx.org/attributes/hx-target/

[anamexis]

Everything HTMX does could be "just" done using JS - this is self-evident. The whole point of HTMX is to enable features like this directly in HTML.

[infamia]

If you do that you'll reset browser state with whatever you're replacing. For example things like scroll position, if the user opened an accordion, etc. would all be lost.

[recursivedoubts]

I mean you're not wrong: end of the day htmx is just some javascript written on top of standard vanilla javascript apis. It tries to handle things in a more html-centric, attributes-driven manner than script-oriented approaches do, but it's nothing too complicated

check out fixi for our ultra-minimalist take on the idea:

https://github.com/bigskysoftware/fixi

Or, for extreme minimalisim, htmz, which repurposes iframes for a similar idea:

https://leanrada.com/htmz/