The friction to try it out is already really low, I like that! But it could be even lower if instead of an image the interactive version is served right on the landing page. Great project!

▲

nhatcher 4 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, Dani the designer involved in the project, keeps saying that. There are two things that stops me from doing that:

* It would make the landing page a bit heavier * I would need to synchronize deployments somehow

But I guess I should do that sooner rather than later.

Thanks!

	▲	RestartKernel 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Just my two cents, but: - In terms of data, this is nothing compared to any site serving a bunch of images. The compute would differ, but loading speed shouldn't be an issue if you can render the HTML first, and hydrate it after page load. This static HTML would then also serve as fallback when Javascript is disabled. - For a quick demo, I doubt you will lose people by embedding an older version. Serving a version of a few months ago seems like 80% of the work, with 20% of the effort, in terms of deployment. Anyhow, nice to see government funds put to a good cause!