@movq@www.uninformativ.de It’s the “Lyse types the entire HTML by hand” generator. Yes, no kidding. I write articles so rarely, that I can do that once in a while. It’s fun to some degree, but also not.

After some time, I finally recorded some Vim macros to insert <b>…</b>, <var>…</var>, <span class=s>…</span> etc. around the tokens. This helped a little bit. But I was still questioning my mental state doing it like that. I also had to fix a bunch of the end tags by hand, because the word movement wasn’t enough or the end movement went too far. Quite the annoying process for sure.

But I think the HTML looks a wee bit nicer and is maybe even semantically a little bit better than having only <span>s everywhere. I find the <span class="whatever"> just soo awfully long. Of course, I never look at the code again, but knowing, that e.g. there is a <b> and it saves so many bytes in comparison, makes me happy. It is a more elegant solution in my opinion. Not by much, but better nonetheless. It’s a matter of simplicity. Admittedly, even I can’t avoid the <span>s alltogether. Oh well. On the other hand, I’m sure that this does not make any difference whatsoever. I bet, nobody and nothing, like a screenreader, analyzes the HTML for that, where this would be truly useful.

Oh! Maybe text browsers, though. It just occurred to me while composing this reply. :-) Haha, I lost my bet quickly. w3m picks up at least the <b> for keywords and builtin types, <u> for filenames and <i> for comments. Yey. No different styles for <var> and <mark>, unfortunately. elinks only renders the bold. It’s cool that I had the right intuition right from the beginning, despite being unable to pinpoint it. :-)

All the <span> hell with common syntax highlighters is a downer for me that keeps me from looking more into them. If I wrote more articles, I might rig something up with Pygments. At least that’s somehow positively connotated in my brain. Not sure if it actually deserves it, but I dealt with that in some loose form (can’t even remember) years and years ago. Apparently, it wasn’t too terrible.

To prepare the table of contents, I used grep and sed with some manual intervention in the end. The entire process can be improved. Absolutely.

You wrote your own site generator, didn’t you?

Hello+from+w3m+on+a+2010+netbook+:)

@itsericwoordward@itsericwoodward.com Doesn’t matter if I use w3m or elinks. No, just kidding. Firefox 115. See also #47fl5jq.

probably+my+w3m+introduced+all+these+“+”+instead+of+spaces

hello+gophers,+yes+i+am+a+w3m+user,+how+did+you+know?+;)

@zvava@twtxt.net Late happy birthday! :-)

Cool, your website indeed mostly works even in w3m and ELinks. Sending notifications in the about page is out of question, since it requires JS. Apart from that, this is very good, keep it up!

Not sure how I can get the deskop look and feel working in Firefox, but since I’m a tiling window manager user, I prefer linear webpages anyway. :-)

@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org yep, I gave it a spin locally! I freaking love the cute logo and the UI is fiiiine 👌 my TUI browsers love it just as much …

Do you believe one can survive surfing the web using a text-based web browser? (i.e: Lynx or W3m) no CSS no Bling for at least 24 hours 😲

enjoying w3m through tor with torsocks to reach btdigg onion http://btdigggink2pdqzqrik3blmqemsbntpzwxottujilcdjfz56jumzfsyd.onion/

Why #w3m rocks: http://www.w3m.rocks/

Great, with ‘|’ key, one can pipe the #w3m buffer to any script. That will be sooo useful :)

Did you know #w3m has tabs feature?

Did you know #w3m support gopher:// links?

Je m’éclate avec w3m

I’m looking for sites suitable for old computers or terminal browsers like w3m. As example, https://text.npr.org or https://wiby.me. Do you have other examples?