Remix.run Logo
tombert 18 hours ago

Many years ago, I decided to reinvent the `blink` tag, because the monsters who make browsers removed support for it.

I didn't know you could just make up tags, but I figured I'd give it a shot, and with a bit of jquery glue and playing with visibility settings, I was able to fix browsers and bring back the glorious blinking. I was surprised you could just do that; I would have assumed that the types of tags are final.

I thought about open sourcing it, but it was seriously like ten lines of code and I suspect that there are dozens of things that did the same thing I did.

chrismorgan 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> because the monsters who make browsers removed support for it

Most browsers never implemented it in the first place. Safari, Chrome, IE and Edge never had it. In terms of current browser names, it was only Firefox and Opera that ever had it, until 2013.

tombert 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Huh, I would have sworn that Internet Explorer had the blink tag at one point, but I think my parents had Netscape and then Mozilla pretty early so maybe that's what I'm confusing it with.

Regardless, I stand by my comment. Monsters! I want my browser to be obnoxious.

chrismorgan 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Never mind, Microsoft got you with <marquee>.

In theory, in 1996 Netscape and Microsoft agreed to kill <blink> and <marquee> <https://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/book4/ch02.html>, but although they were kept out of the spec, neither removed its implementation, and then IE dominated the browser market, and <marquee> became popular enough that the remaining parties were bullied into shipping it (Netscape in 2002, Presto in 2003, no idea about the KHTML/WebKit timeline), and so ultimately it was put into the HTML Standard.

Sesse__ 13 hours ago | parent [-]

KHTML added <marquee> support in October 2003 (commit 7bcdd98aa in the Chromium repository).

1f60c 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I have to say, that is some excellent sleuthing.

Tistron 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think I remember reading articles about how to implement blink in IE using behaviors, some IE only thing that didn't take hold(?), Maybe this was around IE5.

vbezhenar 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

IE was holding back the progress even before Chrome and Safari were a thing.

delaminator 9 hours ago | parent [-]

> IE was holding back the progress

Oh those times. IE accepted <table><tr><td><tr></table> whereas Nestscape demanded <table><tr><td></td></tr></table> and would just not render anything else - just blank grey

Humans loved it, when they had to type all this by hand, because missing /td would not kill your page.

Permissiveness won out.

I also remember the day JavaScript hit the net.

and all those "chat rooms" that did <meta refresh> to look live suddenly had no defence against this

<script>document.write('http://twistys.com/folder/porn.jpg')</script>

or alert bombs

chrismorgan 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Oh those times. <script>document.createElement("table").appendChild(document.createElement("table"))</script> would crash IE, and some similar stupidities could even cause a BSOD as late as Windows 98.

(I think that was one such incantation, but if it wasn’t quite that it was close.)

prox 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Talking about this, I am still sad Flash got removed from the web.

Nothing to replace it with to afaik.

pverheggen 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Well technically you can still use Flash via Ruffle, a WebAssembly-based emulator:

https://ruffle.rs/

Sites like Kongregate amd albinoblacksheep are using it to revive their old catalog.

drowntoge 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Although Flash really sucked as a technology, it did inspire a lot of visual artistry on the web. Half of the cool stuff you saw on StumbleUpon was made with Flash by people who weren't proficient with JS/CSS, which weren’t capable enough to achieve the same results anyway.

tombert 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I stand by that Flash was the most fun way to write software, especially games.

It was so satisfying being able to animate something, and immediately have the ability to create code out if it.

I have not found a platform to replace that, though GameMaker gives something of a facsimile.

robertoandred 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Just keep using Flash? It's called Animate now. https://www.adobe.com/products/animate.html

tombert 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I know, but since there’s not a great way to deploy and share stuff it’s not the same.

Yes I know about Ruffle, but I don’t really want to make a retro game that targets an emulator, I want something that’s consistently updated.

Also Animates pricing model is bullshit.

DemocracyFTW2 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Good riddance. I once had the honor of being featured together with many other artist on an HP website. It was implemented in Flash though, meaning it existed as a smallish rectangle in the middle of a website; within that rectangle you could click through to browse the exhibition one artwork at a time. This entailed that your path through the Flash app was not connected to the browser's address bar and exhibits did not get a URL of their own. When you wanted to direct others to your piece the only way was by giving them a "Japanese visitor's address", as in "go to this well-known named point (the domain name), from there walk west and when you see a tall black building, turn right and take the third alley to your left, I'm living in the fifth house down that alley".

Plenty to replace it with to afaik.

alex_duf 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Really? Flash had been such an absolute pain for me for years, I was so happy when my bank stopped using it so I could uninstall the heck out of it.

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think you can do it fully in CSS these days! https://www.w3docs.com/tools/code-editor/13719

I modified `.blink` to `blink` so it will target the tag instead of the class and it seemed to work

tombert 17 hours ago | parent [-]

This doesn't surprise me, I've seen a lot of cool stuff being done in CSS.

I've never been much of a frontend person, so gluing stuff together with JQuery was kind of my go-to until I was able to abandon the web.

JediBurrell 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I for one am glad that blink is no longer a thing, it's certainly behavior that should require more thought than a simple html element can provide.

tombert 17 hours ago | parent [-]

I just kind of feel like removing it makes the internet less fun. 90's internet was basically a playground for geeky people to make things purely for fun, with basically no ambitions of making any money; people would host their own terrible web pages. My first real introduction to "programming" (other than making a turtle walk around) was when I was nine years old and bought "Make Your Own Web Page : A Guide for Kids" from my school, and this was something a nine year old kid could do because the web was easy and fun to program for. There weren't a billion JavaScript frameworks, CSS was new (if it was even supported), everything was done with tags and I loved it.

Yeah, the sites would be ugly and kind of obnoxious, but there was, for want of a better word, a "purity" to it. It was decidedly uncynical; websites weren't being written to satisfy a corporation like they all are now. You had low-res tiling backgrounds, a shitty midi of the X-files theme playing on a bunch of sites, icons bragging about how the website was written in Notepad, and lots and lots of animated GIFs.

I feel like the removal of blink is just a symptom of the web becoming more boring. Instead of everyone making their own website and personalizing it, now there's like ten websites, and they all look like they were designed by a corporation to satisfy shareholders.

ssl-3 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Aye.

Before blogging was called "blogging," people just wrote what they wrote about whatever they wanted to, however they did that (vi? pico? notepad? netscape communicator's HTML editor? MS frontpage? sure!), uploaded it to their ISP under ~/public_html/index.html or similar [or hosted it on their own computer behind a dialup modem], and that was that.

Visibility was gained with web rings (the more specialized, the better -- usually), occasional keyword hits from the primitive search engines that were available, and (with only a little bit of luck necessary) inclusion on Yahoo's manually-curated index.

And that was good enough. There was no ad revenue to chase, nor any expectation that it'd ever be wildly popular. No custom domains, no Wordpress hosts, no money to spend and none expected in return. No CSS, no frames, no client-side busywork like JS or even imagemaps.

Just paragraphical text, a blinking header, blue links that turned purple once clicked, and the occasional image or table. Simple markup, rendered simply.

Finish it up a grainy low-res static gif of a cat (that your friend with a scanner helped make from a 4x6 photograph), some more links to other folks' own simple pages, a little bright green hit counter at the bottom that was included from some far-flung corner of the Internet, a Netscape Now button, and let it ride.

It was definitely a purer time.

meigwilym 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You have me in tears...