#indieweb 2021-11-10
2021-11-10 UTC
Seirdy, Moosadee, nertzy and gRegor joined the channel
# 
Ruxton chenghiz_: https://indieweb-search.jamesg.blog/ is where it moved to
Seirdy, rockorager, [tw2113_Slack_], maxwelljosly, maxwelljoslyn[d], gRegor, gerben and ranuzz joined the channel
# 
capjamesg[d] Eek. I'll change that. I wrote that entry back when the search engine was just for my blog.
Abhas[m], jfkimmes[m], _inky, [pfefferle], squarepants, noobranu, ranuzz and tetov-irc joined the channel
# 
petermolnar (this is a tiny bit offtopic, but relevant enough not to be in -chat): do you think that modern requirements, such as responsive design, to be able to run/show on any and all platforms, etc are blocking creative/unique looking sites by making it incredibly hard?
# 
[chrisbergr] There are some very creative and unique websites today as well. See Awwwards or the experiments on https://tympanus.net/codrops/
# [chrisbergr] But this costs a lot of money and comes from big houses. Besides, nothing works without JavaScript.
# [chrisbergr] I think for the masses your point is actually the reason why individuality and creativity has disappeared.
squarepants joined the channel
# [chrisbergr] I lost about an hour this morning because I read something about nostalgia here in chat and got stuck on https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/exhibitions.
# petermolnar > nothing works without JavaScript
# petermolnar many of the tympanus ones you linked used to be css-only
# [chrisbergr] Really? Not the new ones, they mostly require some JS frameworks.
# [chrisbergr] And to speak for myself: It's so hard. I've done a lot of those IE 800x600 optimized pages in the past. That was fun. Today, it's not much fun at all. With fluid design you can't create pixel perfect layouts by definition and with responsive breakpoints I would have to build 4-6 complete layouts, I don't have the time.
# petermolnar shush, Loqi
# petermolnar there used to be a site, http://www.dhteumeuleu.com , with wonderful and surprisingly responsive JS gallery ideas. I wonder if those would be usable on mobile in any way. (I'm trying to dig them up from archive.org, without much success so far)
# petermolnar I found one: https://web.archive.org/web/20100209092541/http://www.dhteumeuleu.com/not-in-vein/ - uses hover mouse, which is basically impossible with scrolling fingers on a mobile device
# petermolnar something similar could probably be done with CSS only animation these days, but again, for desktop
# 
Murray[d] I'll argue in the other direction: responsive design and fluid layouts serve to enhance creativity. A lot of the "old web" aesthetic isn't really all that creative, it's just lots of bright colours and pixel art. It's cookie-cutter in its own way, which is why people can so easily replicate it these days
# petermolnar different creativity, I'd say; creativity to overcome problems vs visual design
# petermolnar ?
# petermolnar those are very distinct things; one of them enjoys a problem by trying to make it invisible or to fix it, the other doesn't want problems, just express or conduct a vision
# petermolnar example: you want to paint your house; you don't want to deal with fixing all the cracks, replaster where you have to, just to start painting
# petermolnar someone else one the other hand would see the fixing part as the important bit, and the painting just part of the finishing touches
# [chrisbergr] Murray[d], as I said, there are really creative and unique sites out there. But they cost a lot of money and time. Most people won't invest that into their personal/hobby site I'd guess.
# petermolnar people who enjoy drawing (as in creating a layout) rarely enjoy fixing that drawing when it breaks due to different screen resolutions, aspect ratios, etc. Ask them :)
# 
[KevinMarks] the other thing is that we have tools now that mean we need breakpoints less - we can have more fluid layouts that don't assume a fixed set of Apple devices
# petermolnar That's my whole point: the more devices you need to prepare for, the simpler (looking) your site gets, because adding anything fancy adds exponential complexity to it. The problem with this one is that while simplicity is nice from a reader perspective, it's usually quite bad from the expressionistic/artistic perspective. I know there are exceptions.
# Murray[d] And I'm not sure that the actual effort has really changed much. Sure, you now need to cross-device test a bit, but in the past you'd need to cross-browser test way more, and have to consider things like quirks mode and all manner of weird polyfills, hacks, etc. (or just use Flash) to actually get creative with website layout
rockorager joined the channel
# petermolnar > And I'm not sure that the actual effort has really changed much
# petermolnar Uh. Yes. Yes, it did.
# [chrisbergr] Of course, grid and flexbox are much better than nested div containers or even worse table layouts. But this of course means that certain layouts are hardly doable anymore, so everything becomes a bit flatter and looks more uniform. -But I guess we are really of topic in this channel, right?
# [KevinMarks] The stuff Cassie was showing off with SVG animation is an example fo how you can be more creative now
# [chrisbergr] Murray[d], I'll show you an example of myself. The basic layout is of course easily fluid feasible, but it's about the details. Like these strokes above. This pattern can't just grow along seamlessly. https://christian-hockenberger.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/princeofdune-com-v10-final.jpg
rockorager joined the channel
squarepants and Moosadee joined the channel
# capjamesg[d] Do we have a wiki page on retro web design?
# capjamesg[d] I couldn't find "retro"
# [chrisbergr] This may be not the most relevant topic to the IndieWeb 🙂 Go to webdesignmuseum.org for inspiration 😉
# capjamesg[d] I think it is relevant to us because we often talk about the retro web, either philosophically or in terms of practical design.
# 
Loqi The 1990s was a decade that saw the invention and growth of the web, dominated by independent websites, as well as nascent silos like Geocities, with a particular aesthetic that would come to define the era like under construction graphics, dancing animals, site counters, and guest books https://indieweb.org/1990s
# Murray[d] (but very little actual information, and nothing more under /geocities)
# [KevinMarks] retro is a manifestation of personal webpage design too - there is https://indieweb.org/custom_post_style
# [KevinMarks] If we have indie examples of retro design we want to link to, like those discussed above, then making a page for it makes sense
# [KevinMarks] tanek has terminal theme http://tantek.com/?skin=vtx
# capjamesg[d] Nice tantek + aaronpk!
# capjamesg[d] I am considering rolling out this as a theme on my site: https://jamesg.blog/retro
# capjamesg[d] But I fear the impact on the words written by using such a design.
# petermolnar if it's ain't frames, it ain't retro :P
_inky joined the channel
# [KevinMarks] nah, stuart is retro and he predates frames http://stuartcheshire.org/
n8chz joined the channel
# petermolnar good point; a long time ago I had a discussion with an acquaintance of mine that if a site is old enough (pre-table design, potentially pre-frames) it's responsive and everyone is happy with it.
# petermolnar (hmmmm frame page with table based layout with iframes in cells, oh the wonders of the ancient world)
rockorager joined the channel
# capjamesg[d] Web book?
# capjamesg[d] Oh. Gotcha. I wondered if you meant a print book of a website.
chenghiz_, rockorager, gRegor and [fluffy] joined the channel
# 
[fluffy] This floated by on my Mastodon feed just now: https://dropserver.org
squarepants, rockorager, sennomo, [schmarty], gRegor and johs1 joined the channel
Moosadee, johs1, rockorager, justache, inertia, inertia_, alex11, tetov-irc and jgee joined the channel