←back to thread

210 points Evidlo | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.265s | source

(spoiler: its XSLT)

I've been working on a little demo for how to avoid copy-pasting header/footer boilerplate on a simple static webpage. My goal is to approximate the experience of Jekyll/Hugo but eliminate the need for a build step before publishing. This demo shows how to get basic templating features with XSL so you could write a blog post which looks like

  <?xml version="1.0"?>
  <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/template.xsl"?>
  <page>
      <title>My Article</title>
      <content>
          some content
          <ul>
              <li>hello</li>
              <li>hello</li>
          </ul>
      </content>
  </page>
Some properties which set this approach apart from other methods:

  - no build step (no need to setup Jekyll on the client or configure Github/Gitlab actions)
  - works on any webserver (e.g. as opposed to server-side includes, actions)
  - normal looking URLs (e.g. `example.com/foobar` as opposed to `example.com/#page=foobar`)
There's been some talk about removing XSLT support from the HTML spec [0], so I figured I would show this proof of concept while it still works.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44952185

See also: grug-brain XSLT https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44393817

Show context
b_e_n_t_o_n ◴[] No.44991549[source]
This works client side right? So when a user navigates to this page, it recursively fetches content from the server? And if you have nested includes it would waterfall?

Even single page app frameworks have mostly solved this by doing the rendering on the server instead of making multiple round trips from the client. This feels like the no-JavaScript version of Spinnergeddon.

Does the browser wait for all the includes to resolve before showing the page or does it flicker in?

replies(2): >>44991846 #>>44992318 #
1. dweinus ◴[] No.44992318[source]
If you want server-side compilation, you could just run the xslt transform in ci/cd. It would still be a simpler solution than Jekyll in some regards, but I probably wouldn't do it for more than hobby projects