JavaScript, AJAX, and modern web frameworks have pushed us away from displaying information in a pure and clean way. We need to go back to a better time!
Looks at no-HTML websites
Shit, we've gone back too far!
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
652 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
71897 readers
4931 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The revived No JS Club celebrates websites that don't use Javascript, the powerful but sometimes overused code that's been bloating the web and crashing tabs since 1995. The No CSS Club goes a step further and forbids even a scrap of styling beyond the browser defaults. And there is even the No HTML Club, where you're not even allowed to use HTML. Plain text websites!
The modern web is the pure incarnation of evil. When Satan has a 1v1 with his manager, he confers with the modern web. If Satan is Sauron, then the modern web is Melkor [1]. Every horror that you can imagine is because of the modern web. Modern web is not an existential risk (X-risk), but is an astronomic suffering risk (S-risk) [2]. It is the duty of each and every man, woman, and child to revolt against it. If you're not working on returning civilization to ooga-booga, you're a bad person.
A compromise with the clubs is called for. A hypertext brutalism that uses the raw materials of the web to functional, honest ends while allowing web technologies to support clarity, legibility and accessibility. Compare this notion to the web brutalism of recent times, which started off in similar vein but soon became a self-subverting aesthetic: sites using 2.4MB frameworks to add text-shadow: 40px 40px 0px hotpink to 400kb Helvetica webfonts that were already on your computer.
I also like the idea of implementing "hypotext" as an inversion of hypertext. This would somehow avoid the failure modes of extending the structure of text by failing in other ways that are more fun. But I'm in two minds about whether that would be just a toy (e.g. references banished to metadata, i.e. footnotes are the hypertext) or something more conceptual that uses references to collapse the structure of text rather than extend it (e.g. links are includes and going near them spaghettifies your brain). The term is already in use in a structuralist sense, which is to say there are 2 million words of French I have to read first if I want to get away with any of this.
Republished Under Creative Commons Terms. Boing Boing Original Article.
CSS on the other hand is quite essential to separate layout from content. Which is a good thing, so I can't really think of a reason for a "no-CSS" rule. Specifically if you can use inline styles as well but in a way more messy way.
CSS is useful but also the devil.
CSS is mostly evil when you have to center elements in the page.
text-align: center
or
margin: auto
or
grid
or
flexbox
It's really not that hard now.
What if I still have to support IE6?
Then quit your job and get one that doesn’t need to worry about stuff Microsoft doesn’t support anymore.
I made a promise, Mr. garretble: a promise. "Don't you make me use any other browser," said my nan; and I don't mean to. I don't mean to.
She's still using Windows XP.
Someone will thank you for your service. Not me, but someone.
Then your life choices should be of more concern then centering a div.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Learn flex forget pixels and screen measurements.
load more comments
(16 replies)
I do wonder if we're going to see some websites popping up that kind of hit the reset button on social media and go back to smaller communities of folks with something in common.
I kind of miss the days of actually having online conversations with folks you know are real people (not bots), that aren't trying to be an influencer, or get famous, or some how many money off your interactions.
I think it'll happen, but I don't think it's happening yet.
The unease is already there ("the internet used to be a place"/"why isn't the internet fun any more?" sentiments and #OldWeb #SlowWeb hashtags), but I don't think people are ready to do anything about it.
I'm only one guy, with a small internet following, but I recently had a go at launching a small "Gaymers" webring (well, a simplified version of one). I promoted it on my socials, I laid out why I think it's a good idea, I paid to "Blaze" it on Tumblr – I even emailed some like-minded creators directly.
I rewrote the webpage multiple times, to try to make it more persuasive and more concise. I added a contact form in case people felt uncomfortable emailing me. I loosened the rules to allow commercial websites, as long as they were still independent. I worked hard on the widget and incorporated feedback (made it respect prefers-reduced-motion and made a static version for sites where animation would feel out of place).
I got some good feedback; lots of people said it was interesting, and a good idea. But literally no one joined or expressed any interest in joining. 🤷♂️
I'm going to have one more go at promoting it next time I've got money to spare, but I'll most likely end up quietly deleting it along with any evidence it existed, because a webring of one is fucking embarrassing. 💀
I guess if you build it, they will not necessarily come lmao
You may have more luck with neocities and their sites. Lots of webrings around there and a lot of people having fun.
I've been thinking about something like this but I'm not gay or really much of a gamer any more, so... different webrings I guess.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Check out the gemini protocol: https://geminiprotocol.net/
It kinda fills that niche of the "old web".
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
"No HTML club" is kinda going too far on the Web. If you go there you might as well start a No HTTP Club and serve stuff over Gopher and FTP.
But we definitely need an HTML 2.0 Club.
Might as well do no digital club and we exchange information through mail and pigeons.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Yeah it's not exactly going to be WCAG AAA either.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Just earlier I was reading about this website hosted on solar power and the extremes they went through to get the website to be simple so very little data is transmitted to save precious watts.
The website https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/about/the-solar-website/
This is genuinely inspiring to me, may be my new ADHD hobby for the next couple of weeks.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I can get behind no JS club, I can’t get behind no CSS club.
CSS is 🆒
load more comments
(4 replies)
What we need is a subset of modern web, without any bloat, especially JS frameworks.
A lot of websites can be static HTML + CSS.
The subset exists. What you're referring to is an agreement or convention.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Get this bs outta here. I write on paper! No one knows my thoughts or feelings!!
What devilry is this? Written word? Real cultures use oral history to store knowledge!
Pfff, that's nothing. My club doesn't even have a website.
I am in the "whistling into the phone handset on a dialup connection is the purest form of online communication" club.
load more comments
(1 replies)
How do you use hyperlinks without HTML?
Copy and paste the url
Jesus. This is getting out of hand.
We can go further. We could take away your fancy "URL"s and just use IP addresses for navigation.
Heck, we could do away with TCP/IP altogether and network over serial. It's a perfectly functional protocol with several baud rates to choose from. I like ol' reliable 9600, but I sometimes dabble in 115200 when I'm feeling adventurous.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Might be more accessible than gopherholes and gemini gems(?)
I'll say one thing for the No CSS philosophy - at least it eliminates light-colored text on a light-colored background using the thinnest possible font, which is probably the stupidest stylistic trend since the web began.
You are using ASCII? Weak. True website surfers use raw character values, like The Matrix in 1999.
load more comments
(3 replies)
love this
view more: next ›