standards-positions VS Bridgetown

You can check why Mozilla and Apple have opted to not support this.

https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/154

https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/28

Neither Mozilla or Webkit are satisfied that the proposal is safe by default, and contains footguns for the user that can be pretty destructive.

Nope, was marked as WONTFIX: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182671

There was some more discussion in the webkit standards but looks like the answer is still unchanged: https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/97

The new scrollbar styling properties are actually pretty consistent with native platforms. There's not that much flexibility with them - e.g. you can't define width in pixels, you just chose between thick, thin, or none, which match the existing native controls:

https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/133#iss...

> To add more information to this issue. This property supports three values, auto, thin and none. These match nicely to WebKit's ScrollbarControlSize::Regular and ScrollbarControlSize::Thin and not rendering the scrollbar.

Apple puts their policy positions on GitHub too. It's just where this is done for some reason: https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions

Not yet but one day: https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/18#issu...

Worth also noting is WebKit's standards positions at

https://webkit.org/standards-positions/

(this one has not landed yet, likely to be opposed as well)

I'm using bridgetown because I like sitting on the bleeding edge, its basically a newer Jekyll which I would recommend checking out too. Bridgetown has a great modern dev experience but its missing some of the ecosystem from Jekyll. Not a problem for me because I'm really comfortable with Ruby.

If you want to have a different UI or your blog to look in a very specific way I recommend using Jekyll or Bridgetown.

If I wanted to post a simple website today I would look into Jekyll. There are a ton of articles and answers to common questions etc. It itself is written in Ruby but using it will not likely help you to learn Ruby. One-step in the direction of learning Ruby and getting a simple website could be Bridgetown. This will start you down a path of learning Ruby and not Rails. We use Bridgetown for our company site at Flagrant.

In the Hotwire Turbo world specifically, several discussions about integrating transition animations also took place and a few promising approaches emerged, namely the Turn project or the transitions in Bridgetown. There is also a chapter in the Noel Rappin’s Modern Front-End book and an interesting article but overall, frankly, this topic still fells somewhat early-stage and exploratory.

https://www.bridgetownrb.com/ static site generator. Can be linked with prism of you want a kind of panel to add new articles.

FYI. I used Bridgetown as a static site generator recently and rather enjoyed it. https://github.com/bridgetownrb/bridgetown.

If you’re not adept in that right now you’re unlikely to create a system to support it. I would encourage you to look into Jekyll or Bridgetown.rb as blog systems that support all the SEO bells and whistles without you having to recreate them.