Hamburger Menus

[David Kleinecke]

In my never-ending quest for wisdom I was reading websites
advising on user interface design. There I happened on the
term "hamburger menu" which I gather is a "well-known" term
for the symbols you have to click on to get what used to be
in the menu. I didn't encounter this before because I am not
a smartphone user.

It seem to me that hiding away the menu - and tool bars -
is an attempt to gratify the impulsive behavior of very
uninformed users. The justification offered is that menus
presented too much information and confused the user.

Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by David Kleinecke
In my never-ending quest for wisdom I was reading websites
advising on user interface design. There I happened on the
term "hamburger menu" which I gather is a "well-known" term
for the symbols you have to click on to get what used to be
in the menu. I didn't encounter this before because I am not
a smartphone user.

I learned it here some months ago when I was complaining about a site that
didn't have either a menu bar with dropdowns, or a triangle to indicate a
dropdown menu.

It's apparently trendy, as it's used on some of the restaurant sites I've
recently had to look at -- the sort of place that doesn't put dollar-signs
on the menu also doesn't like to be explicit on its web pages.

Post by David Kleinecke
It seem to me that hiding away the menu - and tool bars -
is an attempt to gratify the impulsive behavior of very
uninformed users. The justification offered is that menus
presented too much information and confused the user.
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Not mine.

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

Post by David Kleinecke
In my never-ending quest for wisdom I was reading websites
advising on user interface design. There I happened on the
term "hamburger menu" which I gather is a "well-known" term
for the symbols you have to click on to get what used to be
in the menu. I didn't encounter this before because I am not
a smartphone user.
It seem to me that hiding away the menu - and tool bars -
is an attempt to gratify the impulsive behavior of very
uninformed users. The justification offered is that menus
presented too much information and confused the user.
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Huh? Either you still don't understand what hamburger menus are or
you don't have genuine W10!

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by David Kleinecke
In my never-ending quest for wisdom I was reading websites
advising on user interface design. There I happened on the
term "hamburger menu" which I gather is a "well-known" term
for the symbols you have to click on to get what used to be
in the menu. I didn't encounter this before because I am not
a smartphone user.
It seem to me that hiding away the menu - and tool bars -
is an attempt to gratify the impulsive behavior of very
uninformed users. The justification offered is that menus
presented too much information and confused the user.
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Huh? Either you still don't understand what hamburger menus are or
you don't have genuine W10!

It is possible that I don't know what hamburger menus are.
I do see UI arrangements that work just like the description
of hamburger menus. I admit to not seeing the three-bars-
stacked-on-top-of-each-other icon that induced the name
hamburger. I do see three dots in a pile and I assumed that
is equivalent.

What software actually has hamburgers?

[Quinn C]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by David Kleinecke
In my never-ending quest for wisdom I was reading websites
advising on user interface design. There I happened on the
term "hamburger menu" which I gather is a "well-known" term
for the symbols you have to click on to get what used to be
in the menu. I didn't encounter this before because I am not
a smartphone user.
It seem to me that hiding away the menu - and tool bars -
is an attempt to gratify the impulsive behavior of very
uninformed users. The justification offered is that menus
presented too much information and confused the user.
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Huh? Either you still don't understand what hamburger menus are or
you don't have genuine W10!

It is possible that I don't know what hamburger menus are.
I do see UI arrangements that work just like the description
of hamburger menus. I admit to not seeing the three-bars-
stacked-on-top-of-each-other icon that induced the name
hamburger. I do see three dots in a pile and I assumed that
is equivalent.
What software actually has hamburgers?

Mainly lots of Web pages, of course - which make up a large part of the
software a large part of the audience uses these days.

But also e.g. Firefox. I guess your three dots refer to Chrome. Nothing
to do with Windows 10 - Firefox and Chrome look pretty much identical
to their Windows siblings on my Ubuntu, i.e. on Unity desktop.

[s***@gowanhill.com]

Post by David Kleinecke
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Burgered, I'd agree with.

And where did we get a cog-wheel for 'settings' from? Although in Firefox the cog-wheel is 'options' and a litle quill pen is 'customise'.

Owain

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

Post by s***@gowanhill.com

Post by David Kleinecke
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Burgered, I'd agree with.
And where did we get a cog-wheel for 'settings' from?

Windows 95!

[s***@gowanhill.com]

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by s***@gowanhill.com
And where did we get a cog-wheel for 'settings' from?

Windows 95!

Something 23 years old is still new and confusing to me

Owain

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by s***@gowanhill.com

Post by David Kleinecke
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Burgered, I'd agree with.
And where did we get a cog-wheel for 'settings' from?

Windows 95!

To me at least Windows 95 actually had a more useable UI than
Windows 10. But it was nowhere near as pretty.

It is amazing how much care they put into borders and edges in
old days.

[Snidely]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by s***@gowanhill.com

Post by David Kleinecke
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Burgered, I'd agree with.
And where did we get a cog-wheel for 'settings' from?

Windows 95!

To me at least Windows 95 actually had a more useable UI than
Windows 10. But it was nowhere near as pretty.
It is amazing how much care they put into borders and edges in
old days.

I guess I have a pretty high tolerance for UIs, W10 seems as good to me
as any since NT4. I used both W3.1 and W95, but I can't say I want
either of them back. (And NT4 had a lot of what was good in W95
without just being lipstick on DOS.)

Linux has UI behaviors I don't care for, with most of my annoyance
coming from the various experiments with how ALT-TAB cycles through
windows, and to a lesser extent the business of hiding the "minimize"
button. And ls colors seems to be an exercise in arcane-ery.

/dps

[Pierre Jelenc]

Post by David Kleinecke
It seem to me that hiding away the menu - and tool bars -
is an attempt to gratify the impulsive behavior of very
uninformed users. The justification offered is that menus
presented too much information and confused the user.

That's rarely the reason; on mobile devices, spread out menus take too
much space on too small a screen so that if you --as you should-- put
actual information on the start page of a web site or program, that gets
pushed down by the menu and it may actually become invisible until you
scroll down.

Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.

What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Pierre

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?

(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting;
Chrome does some of it for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger menu;
you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups.
Static files for actual content are pretty rare these days.

/dps

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting;
Chrome does some of it for you but doesn't expose much control of it)
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger menu;
you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups.
Static files for actual content are pretty rare these days.

By the way, did we cover the Trivial Pursuit tile
that the name comes from looking like a hamburger [sandwich] in profile?

<URL:http://thepinnacle.com/directory/burgerim/>
<URL:Loading Image...>
from
<URL:http://www.evseats.com/sneak-peak-burgerim-usa-first-us-location-hollywoood/>

/dps

[Garrett Wollman]

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger menu;
you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups.
Static files for actual content are pretty rare these days.

Actually, there's been a significant trend towards
(non-surveillance-enabling) static site generators for states whose
content actually is static in recent years. Most of these are either
JavaScript-free or use JavaScript only where it's actually necessary
(e.g., search or auto-complete).

Which is not to deny that if you hire a designer or consultant these
days you're very likely to end up with a super-heavy-weight CMS with
megabytes of JavaScript bloat included on every page.

-GAWollman

[Snidely]

On Wednesday, Garrett Wollman pointed out that ...

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger
menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups.
Static files for actual content are pretty rare these days.

Actually, there's been a significant trend towards
(non-surveillance-enabling) static site generators for states whose

or did you mean sights?

Post by Garrett Wollman
content actually is static in recent years. Most of these are either
JavaScript-free or use JavaScript only where it's actually necessary
(e.g., search or auto-complete).

If search means something more than the browser's text search within a
page (and I'm expecting that you do mean something more), than that is
the sort of thing jQuery is used for, and autocomplete is often a
database lookup, and so also jQuery. Even if you prefer to do the Ajax
yourself, that's still JavaScript.

Post by Garrett Wollman
Which is not to deny that if you hire a designer or consultant these
days you're very likely to end up with a super-heavy-weight CMS with
megabytes of JavaScript bloat included on every page.

I could use a benchmark. This site uses Javascript, in part to manage
CSS and in part to do jQuery/Ajax. The slide carousel isn't in place
yet, so the site is a boring sight, but I'd like your opinion on how
much bloat is currently present.

[The framework architect is leaning towards Vue for the next-generation
client-side]

<URL:https://py.searailfoam.net/MusicBDs/overview>

(Safe for work, content available in other forms on many sites
elsewhere, and at least a few of you will recognize more than one name,
although none of those names represent a poster here in AUE.)

/dps

[Pierre Jelenc]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting;
Chrome does some of it for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

And you trust Chrome because ... Google?

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their
Hamburger menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the
page,

And that is exactly the problem. They force you to whitelist the site
ostensibly to get their stupid but innocuous menu working, and now you've
opened the door to everything.

Post by s***@gmail.com
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups. Static files for
actual content are pretty rare these days.

I've coded many dynamic sites with a database backend, and not once have I
required any javascript to allow basic functionality and content. The only
reason they do it is that they can piggyback all their spyware on it.
Javascript should never be required to get the cake, or even to get the
icing on the cake. It should (if at all) only be used to pretty up the
writing on the icing.

Pierre

[Quinn C]

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting;
Chrome does some of it for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

And you trust Chrome because ... Google?

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their
Hamburger menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the
page,

And that is exactly the problem. They force you to whitelist the site
ostensibly to get their stupid but innocuous menu working, and now you've
opened the door to everything.

Post by s***@gmail.com
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups. Static files for
actual content are pretty rare these days.

I've coded many dynamic sites with a database backend, and not once have I
required any javascript to allow basic functionality and content. The only
reason they do it is that they can piggyback all their spyware on it.
Javascript should never be required to get the cake, or even to get the
icing on the cake. It should (if at all) only be used to pretty up the
writing on the icing.

That is a narrow viewpoint. A major reason to use Javascript these days
is outsourcing the processing to the client, which makes serving a
certain number of requests cheaper, much cheaper in some cases. I guess
that wasn't a major concern in the cases you worked on.

Whitelisting allows (in principle) to run only the Javascript from the
site you're looking at. The big problems usually come from third-party
scripts, which can stay blocked. I think my ublock overall does a good
job of that.

[Snidely]

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting;
Chrome does some of it for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

And you trust Chrome because ... Google?

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their
Hamburger menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the
page,

And that is exactly the problem. They force you to whitelist the site
ostensibly to get their stupid but innocuous menu working, and now you've
opened the door to everything.

No, they do the menu that way because they already have the tools in
place.

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups. Static files for
actual content are pretty rare these days.

I've coded many dynamic sites with a database backend, and not once have I
required any javascript to allow basic functionality and content. The only
reason they do it is that they can piggyback all their spyware on it.

You know, the javascript is something that can be inspected.

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Javascript should never be required to get the cake, or even to get the
icing on the cake. It should (if at all) only be used to pretty up the
writing on the icing.
Pierre

You do it all with forms and anchors? Do you do endless scrolling that
way? Do you react to changes in focus?

/dps

[Snidely]

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting; Chrome does some of it
for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

And you trust Chrome because ... Google?

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger
menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,

And that is exactly the problem. They force you to whitelist the site
ostensibly to get their stupid but innocuous menu working, and now you've
opened the door to everything.

No, they do the menu that way because they already have the tools in place.

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups. Static files for actual
content are pretty rare these days.

I've coded many dynamic sites with a database backend, and not once have I
required any javascript to allow basic functionality and content. The only
reason they do it is that they can piggyback all their spyware on it.

You know, the javascript is something that can be inspected.

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Javascript should never be required to get the cake, or even to get the
icing on the cake. It should (if at all) only be used to pretty up the
writing on the icing.
Pierre

You do it all with forms and anchors? Do you do endless scrolling that way?
Do you react to changes in focus?

And, reminded by Quinn, do you allow the user to re-sort on arbitrary
columns?
<URL:https://datatables.net/extensions/scroller/examples/>

[from one of their other pages]
<quote>
DataTables is free open source software, available under the MIT
license, and you are free to download it and use as you see fit.

DataTables is a huge project, and it is made possible through the
support of people such as yourself. Please join us in making the web a
better place for your data to live and contribute to helping
DataTables' continued development by purchasing one of the supporter
packages below.
</quote>

/dps

[Lewis]

Post by Snidely

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting; Chrome does some of it
for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

And you trust Chrome because ... Google?

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger
menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,

And that is exactly the problem. They force you to whitelist the site
ostensibly to get their stupid but innocuous menu working, and now you've
opened the door to everything.

No, they do the menu that way because they already have the tools in place.

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups. Static files for actual
content are pretty rare these days.

I've coded many dynamic sites with a database backend, and not once have I
required any javascript to allow basic functionality and content. The only
reason they do it is that they can piggyback all their spyware on it.

You know, the javascript is something that can be inspected.

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Javascript should never be required to get the cake, or even to get the
icing on the cake. It should (if at all) only be used to pretty up the
writing on the icing.
Pierre

You do it all with forms and anchors? Do you do endless scrolling that way?
Do you react to changes in focus?

And, reminded by Quinn, do you allow the user to re-sort on arbitrary
columns?
<URL:https://datatables.net/extensions/scroller/examples/>
[from one of their other pages]
<quote>
DataTables is free open source software, available under the MIT
license, and you are free to download it and use as you see fit.

I use that library on several pages, it is very useful.

JavaScript is very useful, and it's waht makes the modern web work. I do
a lot with CSS, including a lot of things that look like CSS, but
there's a lot that is sort of possible in CSS but is really a terrible
hack that, for example, breaks screen readers.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Lewis

Post by Snidely

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Once you have the hamburger for mobile devices, it becomes a matter of UI
standardization to use it everywhere.
What does piss me off is that most web sites use (and require) javascript
for that purpose, increasing immensely the risk of malware, even though
it's easy to code a hamburger menu with pure CSS.

Whitelisting?
(I use NoScript on FF to control my whitelisting; Chrome does some of it
for you but doesn't expose much control of it)

And you trust Chrome because ... Google?

Post by s***@gmail.com
Note that it's pretty small beans that you need the JS for Their Hamburger
menu; you probably also need it for getting the data onto the page,

And that is exactly the problem. They force you to whitelist the site
ostensibly to get their stupid but innocuous menu working, and now you've
opened the door to everything.

No, they do the menu that way because they already have the tools in place.

Post by Pierre Jelenc

Post by s***@gmail.com
because jQuery is going to be used for look-ups. Static files for actual
content are pretty rare these days.

I've coded many dynamic sites with a database backend, and not once have I
required any javascript to allow basic functionality and content. The only
reason they do it is that they can piggyback all their spyware on it.

You know, the javascript is something that can be inspected.

Post by Pierre Jelenc
Javascript should never be required to get the cake, or even to get the
icing on the cake. It should (if at all) only be used to pretty up the
writing on the icing.
Pierre

You do it all with forms and anchors? Do you do endless scrolling that way?
Do you react to changes in focus?

And, reminded by Quinn, do you allow the user to re-sort on arbitrary
columns?
<URL:https://datatables.net/extensions/scroller/examples/>
[from one of their other pages]
<quote>
DataTables is free open source software, available under the MIT
license, and you are free to download it and use as you see fit.

I use that library on several pages, it is very useful.
JavaScript is very useful, and it's waht makes the modern web work. I do
a lot with CSS, including a lot of things that look like CSS, but
there's a lot that is sort of possible in CSS but is really a terrible
hack that, for example, breaks screen readers.

I have been trying to read my way through an HTML document
that is a webpage. It starts out with 1200 lines of style
and I have just reached some script. There mat be some
content in there somewhere.

It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

[Garrett Wollman]

Post by David Kleinecke
It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

WebKit is the name of the rendering library that has been passed
around between the KDE project (Konqueror), Apple (Safari), and Google
(Chromium) over the past decade. I think only Apple is still using it
-- Google wrote a new rendering engine for Chrom(e|ium) and IIRC
doesn't use WebKit any more, but a lot of minor third-party browsers
and a lot of non-browser applications that render HTML text
incorporated WebKit as a library and may still use it.

-GAWollman

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by David Kleinecke
It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

WebKit is the name of the rendering library that has been passed
around between the KDE project (Konqueror), Apple (Safari), and Google
(Chromium) over the past decade. I think only Apple is still using it
-- Google wrote a new rendering engine for Chrom(e|ium) and IIRC
doesn't use WebKit any more, but a lot of minor third-party browsers
and a lot of non-browser applications that render HTML text
incorporated WebKit as a library and may still use it.

Do you mean by "library" a collection of pieces of style
and script one can copy into one's HTML document?

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by David Kleinecke
It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

WebKit is the name of the rendering library that has been passed
around between the KDE project (Konqueror), Apple (Safari), and Google
(Chromium) over the past decade. I think only Apple is still using it
-- Google wrote a new rendering engine for Chrom(e|ium) and IIRC
doesn't use WebKit any more, but a lot of minor third-party browsers
and a lot of non-browser applications that render HTML text
incorporated WebKit as a library and may still use it.

Do you mean by "library" a collection of pieces of style
and script one can copy into one's HTML document?

No, in this case he means something used to make the dot-exe that is the browser [on Windows].

There are things that you can put in your HTML document that elicit
special features (or work around pure idiosyncrasies),
and those may be called libraries
(like the Datatables package mentioned before).
Sometimes the developer of the rendering engine provides both,
others get worked out by people trying to deal with making stuff work
(Internet Explorer generated a lot of the latter).

/dps

[David Kleinecke]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by David Kleinecke
It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

WebKit is the name of the rendering library that has been passed
around between the KDE project (Konqueror), Apple (Safari), and Google
(Chromium) over the past decade. I think only Apple is still using it
-- Google wrote a new rendering engine for Chrom(e|ium) and IIRC
doesn't use WebKit any more, but a lot of minor third-party browsers
and a lot of non-browser applications that render HTML text
incorporated WebKit as a library and may still use it.

Do you mean by "library" a collection of pieces of style
and script one can copy into one's HTML document?

No, in this case he means something used to make the dot-exe that is the browser [on Windows].
There are things that you can put in your HTML document that elicit
special features (or work around pure idiosyncrasies),
and those may be called libraries
(like the Datatables package mentioned before).
Sometimes the developer of the rendering engine provides both,
others get worked out by people trying to deal with making stuff work
(Internet Explorer generated a lot of the latter).

OK I understand how a browser works in its simplest form.
It reads an HTML document and displays (= renders) its
contents on a monitor. The style (CSS) juggles the display
parameters. I am trying to learn the next step.

As I see it it is assumed that a DOM is built and the
scripts do things to the DOM. I understand that the website
that supplied the HTML can also help if asked correctly. If
that sounds vague it is because I do not yet fully grasp
exactly what is going on.

Given the model I just supplied for HTML - where does
webkit fit?

[Richard Tobin]

Post by David Kleinecke
OK I understand how a browser works in its simplest form.
It reads an HTML document and displays (= renders) its
contents on a monitor. The style (CSS) juggles the display
parameters. I am trying to learn the next step.
As I see it it is assumed that a DOM is built and the
scripts do things to the DOM. I understand that the website
that supplied the HTML can also help if asked correctly. If
that sounds vague it is because I do not yet fully grasp
exactly what is going on.
Given the model I just supplied for HTML - where does
webkit fit?

If you wanted to write a web browser, you could start from WebKit, and
have much less to do. It's not something anyone other than browser
writers needs to know about.

-- Richard

[Garrett Wollman]

Post by Richard Tobin

Post by David Kleinecke
Given the model I just supplied for HTML - where does
webkit fit?

If you wanted to write a web browser, you could start from WebKit, and
have much less to do. It's not something anyone other than browser
writers needs to know about.

*Except* if you want to write some CSS that takes advantage of a
non-standard feature that is implemented in WebKit but isn't in other
browsers (or works differently in other browsers). Each rendering
engine implements non-standard CSS properties named
"-enginename-some-fancy-property-name" to allow designers to specify
the fanciest rendering implemented only by the most recent development
release of half of the browsers in the market.

-GAWollman

[Madhu]

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by David Kleinecke
It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

WebKit is the name of the rendering library that has been passed
around between the KDE project (Konqueror), Apple (Safari), and Google
(Chromium) over the past decade. I think only Apple is still using it
-- Google wrote a new rendering engine for Chrom(e|ium) and IIRC
doesn't use WebKit any more, but a lot of minor third-party browsers
and a lot of non-browser applications that render HTML text
incorporated WebKit as a library and may still use it.

Paradoxically webkit has now become the browser engine that is
least-influenced by google. On GTK/linux the webkitgtk library is the
only html rendering alternative which is not directly controlled by
google. It still gets all the google surveillance technologies pushed
on it by default. Non-optional javascript non-controllable
network-accesses - all user control of network accesses is being
designed out of the framework. (like forced https/upgrade,
non-cancellable beacons - all the satanic w3c technology that gets
pushed for the sake of "developers" under an "advertising" narrative.)
it is time technologists grew a penis/brain and admitted advertising is
just another name for surveillance, and the advertising money is just a
cover for surveillance/mark-of-the-beast/ money, and incredible
google/apple/amazon share values of the past decade are just futures
being traded on the souls which are being handed over to satan for the
burning in the lake of fire, and they are just selling themselves over
to the fire for the stock values.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Madhu

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by David Kleinecke
It looks like I must learn something called "webkit".

WebKit is the name of the rendering library that has been passed
around between the KDE project (Konqueror), Apple (Safari), and Google
(Chromium) over the past decade. I think only Apple is still using it
-- Google wrote a new rendering engine for Chrom(e|ium) and IIRC
doesn't use WebKit any more, but a lot of minor third-party browsers
and a lot of non-browser applications that render HTML text
incorporated WebKit as a library and may still use it.

Paradoxically webkit has now become the browser engine that is
least-influenced by google. On GTK/linux the webkitgtk library is the
only html rendering alternative which is not directly controlled by
google. It still gets all the google surveillance technologies pushed
on it by default. Non-optional javascript non-controllable
network-accesses - all user control of network accesses is being
designed out of the framework. (like forced https/upgrade,
non-cancellable beacons - all the satanic w3c technology that gets
pushed for the sake of "developers" under an "advertising" narrative.)
it is time technologists grew a penis/brain and admitted advertising is
just another name for surveillance, and the advertising money is just a
cover for surveillance/mark-of-the-beast/ money, and incredible
google/apple/amazon share values of the past decade are just futures
being traded on the souls which are being handed over to satan for the
burning in the lake of fire, and they are just selling themselves over
to the fire for the stock values.

You are passionate about something. Unfortunately I can't
tell what. It's off-topic at AUE but I hate to see a good
rant go to waste. In a couple of simple sentences, please -
what are you so upset about?

[Lewis]

Post by David Kleinecke
You are passionate about something. Unfortunately I can't
tell what. It's off-topic at AUE but I hate to see a good
rant go to waste. In a couple of simple sentences, please -
what are you so upset about?

Whenever someone goes off on an incoherent rant that includes the phrase
"mark of the beast" I back away.

You might consider it?

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Lewis

Post by David Kleinecke
You are passionate about something. Unfortunately I can't
tell what. It's off-topic at AUE but I hate to see a good
rant go to waste. In a couple of simple sentences, please -
what are you so upset about?

Whenever someone goes off on an incoherent rant that includes the phrase
"mark of the beast" I back away.
You might consider it?

Curiosity killed a cat. That's how I am feelin.

[Madhu]

You are passionate about something. Unfortunately I can't tell what.
It's off-topic at AUE but I hate to see a good rant go to waste. In a
couple of simple sentences, please - what are you so upset about?

I must apologize for not obliging you with an answer at this time. But
I wouldn't think I am passionate - not enough to do something about it -
besides what could one do anyway one except wait for the
apocalyptic-script to play itself out and the messiah to sort out the
mess

[Pierre Jelenc]

Post by Snidely
And, reminded by Quinn, do you allow the user to re-sort on arbitrary
columns?
<URL:https://datatables.net/extensions/scroller/examples/>

I have no problem with that, it's an optional add-on. If the data are on
screen, it's perfectly fine to use js to fancy up the display. It's not OK
to demand js to get the data in the first place.

Pierre

[Pierre Jelenc]

Post by Snidely
You know, the javascript is something that can be inspected.

Sure; provided you understand it. How many people do? And how many scripts
are you willing to inspect? Especially obfuscated and nested ones?

Post by Snidely
You do it all with forms and anchors?

Not sure what you're asking here. Of course, forms to submit data, and
anchors for links.

Post by Snidely
Do you do endless scrolling that way?

I certainly do not do endless scrolling, that is repulsive! "Wait ... wait
... wait ..."

Post by Snidely
Do you react to changes in focus?

In what; or on what?

Pierre

[Paul Carmichael]

Post by David Kleinecke
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Do many people actually use the W10 native interface? I thought amost everyone had
installed Classic Shell. The other day my neighbour asked for my help with his W10 laptop.
It was native W10 interface and just about everything seemed nigh on impossible.

Squares and more squares. Seems to be designed for smartphone addicts.

[Snidely]

Post by Paul Carmichael

Post by David Kleinecke
Now I know what I am against - hamburger menus. At the moment
I am losing - Windows 10 has hamburgered everything in sight.

Do many people actually use the W10 native interface? I thought amost
everyone had installed Classic Shell.

That piece of junk?

Post by Paul Carmichael
The other day my neighbour asked for my
help with his W10 laptop. It was native W10 interface and just about
everything seemed nigh on impossible.
Squares and more squares. Seems to be designed for smartphone addicts.

Eh, just click on "Start" and type the name of what you want. Or bind
your program to the task bar.

And ruminate on the word "tiles", as you tesselate your abode with
Escher sketches.

/dps

[Paul Carmichael]

Post by Snidely

Do many people actually use the W10 native interface? I thought almost everyone had
installed Classic Shell.

That piece of junk?

Why so?

[Snidely]

Post by Paul Carmichael

Post by Snidely

Do many people actually use the W10 native interface? I thought almost
everyone had installed Classic Shell.

That piece of junk?

Why so?

For a cheap shot, but I'm not sure that all the old ways of doing
things were better. About the only long-gone UI I have any nostalgia
for was the Lisa's thing of "tearing off" a new document. Oh, and
there was something about a game with bricks on NT3.51.

The W10 Start Menu is no problem for me, although the "popular program"
thing goes by the number of times you open the application, not by how
much you use the application (I have at least 5 apps that I start soon
after boot, and they usually stay open for weeks at a time).

One of the apps that is always open is Explorer, with the very handy
context menu.

/dps

[Lewis]

Post by Snidely

Post by Paul Carmichael

Post by Snidely

Do many people actually use the W10 native interface? I thought almost
everyone had installed Classic Shell.

That piece of junk?

Why so?

For a cheap shot, but I'm not sure that all the old ways of doing
things were better. About the only long-gone UI I have any nostalgia
for was the Lisa's thing of "tearing off" a new document. Oh, and
there was something about a game with bricks on NT3.51.

I miss the "Shelf" from NeXT, which I got to use very little but was
super convenient. Basically, it as a place you could "put down" some
stuff temporarily before then moving them to their final location.

I suspect that after Next acquired Apple, they didn't put it in OS X
because too many people used it much like they use their desktops, as a
PERMANENT storage space.

Post by Snidely
The W10 Start Menu is no problem for me, although the "popular program"
thing goes by the number of times you open the application, not by how
much you use the application (I have at least 5 apps that I start soon
after boot, and they usually stay open for weeks at a time).

I really hate the W10 start menu, but happily I never have to interact
with it. I hit the win key and start tying what I want, and all those
hideous tiles simply blip on the screen and are gone before I can see
them.

The Win95-Win7 start menu was bad, but the Win10 one is just hideous
except for the search which is pretty good, or at least good enough.

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

Post by Lewis

Post by Snidely

Post by Paul Carmichael

Post by Snidely

Do many people actually use the W10 native interface? I thought almost
everyone had installed Classic Shell.

That piece of junk?

Why so?

For a cheap shot, but I'm not sure that all the old ways of doing
things were better. About the only long-gone UI I have any nostalgia
for was the Lisa's thing of "tearing off" a new document. Oh, and
there was something about a game with bricks on NT3.51.

I miss the "Shelf" from NeXT, which I got to use very little but was
super convenient. Basically, it as a place you could "put down" some
stuff temporarily before then moving them to their final location.
I suspect that after Next acquired Apple, they didn't put it in OS X
because too many people used it much like they use their desktops, as a
PERMANENT storage space.

Post by Snidely
The W10 Start Menu is no problem for me, although the "popular program"
thing goes by the number of times you open the application, not by how
much you use the application (I have at least 5 apps that I start soon
after boot, and they usually stay open for weeks at a time).

I really hate the W10 start menu, but happily I never have to interact
with it. I hit the win key and start tying what I want, and all those
hideous tiles simply blip on the screen and are gone before I can see
them.
The Win95-Win7 start menu was bad, but the Win10 one is just hideous
except for the search which is pretty good, or at least good enough.
--

If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

[Tony Cooper]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 07:18:44 -0700 (PDT), Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

I'm puzzled by why people object to the Start tiles. I never open the
Start menu unless I'm trying to open some program used so rarely that
I don't have an icon on the desktop to open it with.

I've unpinned all the tiles that were provided with Windows that lead
to apps I never use. Some tiles are there, but they are tiles that
open apps my grandson use when they are over.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

What. one by one? Won't new ones simply appear? or old ones come back?
With neither rhyme nor reason?

Plus, I'd like to have back the Recent dropdown on the Start menu, which
showed me the last 10 or so files, without having to click on Explorer
in the taskbar and wait for it to populate itself, plus which there
doesn't seem to be a principle for which recently opened files appear
there and which don't.

[Paul Carmichael]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

What. one by one? Won't new ones simply appear? or old ones come back?
With neither rhyme nor reason?
Plus, I'd like to have back the Recent dropdown on the Start menu, which
showed me the last 10 or so files, without having to click on Explorer
in the taskbar and wait for it to populate itself, plus which there
doesn't seem to be a principle for which recently opened files appear
there and which don't.

http://www.classicshell.net/

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Paul Carmichael

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

What. one by one? Won't new ones simply appear? or old ones come back?
With neither rhyme nor reason?
Plus, I'd like to have back the Recent dropdown on the Start menu, which
showed me the last 10 or so files, without having to click on Explorer
in the taskbar and wait for it to populate itself, plus which there
doesn't seem to be a principle for which recently opened files appear
there and which don't.

http://www.classicshell.net/

Thank you -- but it says "works with" W7, as if it goes back to NT or XP
or something, whereas what I want to go back to is W7. I expect that W7
is still buried somewhere within W10, since sometimes when you dig down,
you find familiar things. (How many ways are there to maintain backwards
compatibility.) Plus there was someone's negative comment here about it.

[Madrigal Gurneyhalt]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

What. one by one? Won't new ones simply appear? or old ones come back?
With neither rhyme nor reason?
Plus, I'd like to have back the Recent dropdown on the Start menu, which
showed me the last 10 or so files, without having to click on Explorer
in the taskbar and wait for it to populate itself, plus which there
doesn't seem to be a principle for which recently opened files appear
there and which don't.

<https://www.howtogeek.com/274573/how-do-you-get-the-all-recent-files-list-back-in-windows-10/>

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

Right click > Unpin from Start

What. one by one? Won't new ones simply appear? or old ones come back?
With neither rhyme nor reason?
Plus, I'd like to have back the Recent dropdown on the Start menu, which
showed me the last 10 or so files, without having to click on Explorer
in the taskbar and wait for it to populate itself, plus which there
doesn't seem to be a principle for which recently opened files appear
there and which don't.

<https://www.howtogeek.com/274573/how-do-you-get-the-all-recent-files-list-back-in-windows-10/>

Every one of the suggested "solutions" is a work-around, not a revival
of the old way that did exactly what was needed.

But thanks for trying!

[Tony Cooper]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 06:14:03 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all their
"beautiful" work, you know.

The instructions are found by Google>remove start tiles.

There's a whole world of instructions available using Google.

[Kerr-Mudd,John]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 16:49:28 GMT, Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 06:14:03 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all
their "beautiful" work, you know.

The instructions are found by Google>remove start tiles.
There's a whole world of instructions available using Google.

This isn't what PTD wants to hear, he needs spoonfeeding. Or an argument.
Damn it, I've fallen for his ruse again.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 16:49:28 GMT, Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 06:14:03 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all
their "beautiful" work, you know.

The instructions are found by Google>remove start tiles.
There's a whole world of instructions available using Google.

This isn't what PTD wants to hear, he needs spoonfeeding. Or an argument.
Damn it, I've fallen for his ruse again.

And the person puts foot in mouth once again!

[Kerr-Mudd,John]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:14:03 GMT, "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
If you don't like the tiles, remove them. Geez. It's not rocket science.

How do I do that? It didn't come with instructions for undoing all
their "beautiful" work, you know.

Did I mention "search engines" yet?