| ▲ | andersmurphy 3 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Why bother with v4 at all? If it dilutes that simpler interface? I think that even with req/resp morph leads to a simpler majority use case and that's what Turbo and Datastar have both shown. No? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | alexpetros 3 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Why bother with v4 at all? If it dilutes that simpler interface? v4 makes almost no changes to the interface, other than to flip inheritance to be off by default. > I think that even with req/resp morph leads to a simpler majority use case and that's what Turbo and Datastar have both shown. No? Although you can use the idiomorph extension for htmx, I personally don't think idiomorph is simpler, because there's an algorithm choosing what parts of the page get replaced based on the server response; I prefer to specify exactly what parts of the page get replaced in much simpler terms, a CSS selector, with `hx-target`. Per [1] above, my style is minimize partial page responses wherever possible, so the ones that I do have are bespoke and replace a specific thing. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||