diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'posts/2021-04-20-how-to-make-your-website-boring-and-why.php')
| -rw-r--r-- | posts/2021-04-20-how-to-make-your-website-boring-and-why.php | 156 |
1 files changed, 156 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/posts/2021-04-20-how-to-make-your-website-boring-and-why.php b/posts/2021-04-20-how-to-make-your-website-boring-and-why.php new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6f8136d --- /dev/null +++ b/posts/2021-04-20-how-to-make-your-website-boring-and-why.php @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +<?php +$title = "How to Make Your Website Boring and Why!"; +if (isset($early) && $early) { + return; +} +include($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . '/includes/head.php'); +?> + +<p class="description"> + I took the time last year to make my website more boring. Here's how you + can do the same and why you'd want to. +</p> + +<p> + Up until recently I was using a static site generator + <a>(cobalt-rs)</a> and a fancy CSS framework/library <a>(Bulma)</a> to + build my website. I also had one or two scripts to do various fiddly + things in the browser. I took the time to gut it and now I have a much + more boring website. I don't use anything but HTML to write all of the + posts and pages. This eliminated the need for a static generator or + script to turn something like Markdown into HTML for me. I also scrapped + all of the customized CSS framework style sheets that I had been using + for a very small (145 lines including whitespace and braces) single-file + stylesheet. I also dropped all of the fancy links, banners, most of the + icons, and any JavaScript that I had originally. Now, my site is much + more boring. And it's so much better. +</p> + +<h2>How does one make their website boring?</h2> + +<p> + Typically, ask yourself whether you need something. If the answer is + "no", you can safely remove it and you won't need it again. Your website + will become more boring (read: simpler). Here are some of the things I + evaluated: +</p> + +<ul> + <li> + How many 3rd-party assets, templates, CSS libraries am I using? How + big are they? Are they slowing down rendering or annoying to + maintain/upgrade? + </li> + <li>Do I need a Sass interpreter to "build" my styles?</li> + <li> + Am I using a static site generator? Does it make my life easier or + more difficult? + </li> + <li> + Am I using a bunch of JavaScript? What does it do and does it really + need to do it to make my site work better? + </li> +</ul> + +<p> + Do you use a lot of third-party assets, templates, or CSS for your site? + Do you have to run a SASS tool to generate your stylesheets? Are your + stylesheets really big (> 1000 lines I think anyone would consider on + the bigger side)? Consider whether or not you really need them. + Oftentimes, with CSS, less is more. Especially if your site is just a + collection of pages of text with links to other pages of text. You can + make your site attractive and compatible with 100% of browsers by + keeping things simple. And then you don't have to worry about rebuilding + your output stylesheets or keeping up with libraries and frameworks. +</p> + +<p> + Do you have a lot of dynamically-generated content on your site? Does + the document need to change based on user input? Do you have a large + number of script tags importing minified files from third-party CDNs? + Odds are you don't need those either and you can completely get rid of + them. Now you don't have to worry about making sure all browsers can run + those scripts, or whether or not the CDNs are online, or you're + requesting the latest version. +</p> + +<p> + Do you use a static site generator to build your site? Is your content + complicated enough to write that you can't write it in plain HTML? Is + Markdown really easier or more powerful? Odds are, it's easier to write + directly in HTML without having to tell your generator what to do with + your tags. And for the oddball tag that Markdown doesn't directly + support, you might often end up writing HTML into your Markdown files + anyways. And, you can better control what the output formatting looks + like, making your site's code more readable. Furthermore, you won't have + two acting copies of your site, a pre- and post-generator one. For me, + it was annoying having "source code" for my web site that was different + from what I was actually hosting. It's so much nicer to have a 1:1 + mapping between what I write, test, and deploy. +</p> + +<p> + Still not convinced? Still need to automate some part of building your + site, like generating an RSS feed? Is there any chance you can write a + quick Makefile to do that for you? I was able to do just that, and it + was way nicer not having to install and learn how a generator worked to + automate assembling my site. +</p> + +<p> + If you answered "no" to any of the above "do you need"-s, you just found + a way to make your site more boring. Boring equates with simplicity. + Simplicity is a good thing. +</p> + +<h2>Why should you make your website <s>boring</s> simple?</h2> + +<p> + Not relying on a bunch of libraries and assets is a good thing. It + seemed like every time I wanted to add a quick post, I would notice + there was an update for some library I was using and I was spending time + upgrading and learning about it. You know, that thing that computer + programmers enjoy doing and are good at but often doesn't actually help + them accomplish anything: fiddling with shiny new stuff that doesn't + solve a problem. Now I get to just focus on adding things to my site and + I'm never worried about whether it looks broken. +</p> + +<p> + I also didn't like having a pre- and post-build site. If I wanted to fix + one typo I couldn't remote into my live site, fix it, and then leave it + there. I had to do something like fix the typo in my Markdown, commit + and push it, and then re-run the generator and upload the new "live" + files. The generator step wasn't making things easier, it was making + them more annoying. +</p> + +<p> + You'd also be surprised at how easy it is to make your site fast and + reliable on all modern and old browsers when it's boring (read: simple, + again). Internet Explorer doesn't care about my site, it's a breeze to + render and there's nothing in it that hasn't been in existence for at + least a decade. (Alright, I do have a few SVG icons which it probably + wouldn't know what to do with. You can't tell the difference between + Firefox's and Chrome's renders of my site. And Google's PageSpeed + Insights score is a hilarious 99. +</p> + +<p> + My site is also more functional now. It's less distracting. It's really + easy to navigate and read. There's no runtime, no JavaScript that has to + execute before the reader sees the page they're looking for. And there's + practically nothing to maintain except my posts. It's also really easy + for crawlers to quickly ingest all of my posts and turn them into search + results. Hopefully, it's also easier for the visually impaired to zoom + in and not mess up the document, or use a screen reader that extracts + the article tags. +</p> + +<p> + The benefits are through the roof. My site used to be about tinkering + with tools and libraries and frameworks. Now it's just a boring website. + That leaves me with time to focus on tinkering with other stuff that's + more interesting, and only focus on writing when I'm working on this + site. So make your life easier and go make your website boring today. +</p> |