@Crell there is no such thing as "static HTML" in any way having anything to do with HTML except but that HTML was incidental in the production of what was already decidedly "static"
@tetranomos I have absolutely no clue what you just said. It made no sense at all.
Static HTML is widely understood to mean "a .html file on disk that contains HTML markup, which you can serve without further modification." It can get there by ahead of time generation, hand-crafting, or a local WYSIWYG editor, among other methods.
@Crell closing the semantic gap between the aesthetic and the logical involves refusing to conceive computation as static (and finite), which includes the parsing of html. the web's significance is in that hypothesizing resources explain not "what there is on the web" but rather "what there is". in an html document every "equals A" does something to "A" even if that something is hardly different from A. A goes into a loop. it has the look of a virus that is looked at.
@Crell i'm not babbling incoherently, you're speaking from the wrong side of history. what i've explained follows from "curing the vulnerable parser"; i.e., "purposefully crafted data that leads to state corruption and compromise, aka unexpected computation".
@Crell I still use basic HTML on my website from 2002. It loads instantly, it has text and images. Every toads dream. It now has RSS and the world is at my fingertip. Such a joy. It works on all screens, from 720 to ultra wide. Every one is happy. It uses 10Kb of RAM and the CPU/GPU never complain. PS. I never understood JS.
Add comment