Web developers: when you say, “your browser does not support this site,” what you REALLY mean is that YOU don’t support the browser. Don’t turn it around on the user because you chose not to stick to well-supported standards, or worse, are doing user agent sniffing.

If you truly use some feature shipped by one browser and not everyone, at least say, “We use x standard feature, which is unsupported in this browser.” But even then, the web is all about progressive enhancement.

#WebDevelopment

@cassidy I promise I don't mean this as snark - but I tried viewing this post in the NetSurf & Links browsers, and only got a message "To use the Mastodon web application, please enable JavaScript. Alternatively, try one of the native apps for Mastodon for your platform."

I know Mastodon can't run as a web app in Links, I'd never expect that! But it's disappointing that Mastodon posts aren't even readable at their canonical URL as regular HTML :(

@syneryder @cassidy The sad part is *they used to be*! While browsing timelines and making posts always required JS as far as I know, permalinks used to be static pages, as were information pages like /about. 4.0 changed everything into an inaccessible mess.

@eishiya @cassidy Oh wow, you're kidding?! So I guess ActivityPub isn't to blame here for the lack of static pages, it's Mastodon itself. Huh.

I still hand-code all my HTML & run it through HTML validators, dagnabbit! ;)

@syneryder ActivityPub is just the protocol used between servers. Instance websites work like other social websites - there's a backend with the database and post processing, and a front-end, and the Mastodon front-end has been """simplified""" and made more """consistent""".

In fairness, though I do snark on these changes, some convenience has come out of them. I just hate that there's no quick, light way to view Mastodon posts by their permalink URLs now, and that /about requires more trust.