Schon lustig, die ganzen ChatGPT Profis, ob bei LinkedIn, oder Twitter. Irgendwann, wenn du nur lange genug durch deren Timeline scrollst, waren das alles NFT, Metaverse, Crypto oder Bitcoin Allwissende. Die Geschwindigkeit mit der diese Menschen ihr Fähnchen in den Wind halten und umsatteln ist atemberaubend. Ich bin gespannt, was die nächste Hype Technologie wird, mit der diese den Unbedarften Geld aus der Tasche ziehen.
Ich bin offen für neue Technologie, ich benutze ChatGPT sogar regelmäßig um Texte zu verbessern. Mir fällt aber die Killerapplikationen immer noch nicht ein.
Wer zu all dem differenziert eine Meinung lesen will, sollte es mit Molly White probieren.
Meine Verbindung, Landsmannschaft Afrania in Heidelberg, war lange nicht aktualisiert worden und das PHP Backend war in die Jahre gekommen. Auch waren die Mail Formulare immer mehr von Spammern benutzt worden und dabei gingen die wichtigen Nachrichten unter. Ich habe jetzt eine statische Webseite mit 11ty angelegt und ich muss sagen, das macht sehr viel Freude.
Die Seite ist schnell, sieht frisch aus und ist viel besser lesbar.
Gerade habe ich festgestellt, dass die Seite seit 2012, also über 10 Jahre so Bestand hatte.
Letze Woche stellte ich fest, dass ich in über 20 Jahren Internet-Aktivitäten als Web Developer für viele Marken gearbeitet habe. Heute dann die Idee, dass ich diese einfach mal liste.
Das ist nicht chronologisch noch alphabetisch, sondern einfach nur wie sie mir einfielen.
Herta
Nestlé
Pritt
B&O
IMD
Celerant
Fraport
Commerz Netbusiness
Lufthansa
MSH
BSH
Marcs & Spencer
Ladbrokes
Vodafone
Telekom
1und1
Ticona
DHL
McDonald’s
HSBC
John Hancock
Siemens
Carnival
Fleurop
O2
Daimler
Mazda
Audi
Volkswagen
Bob Bomliz Group
Red Bull
Aegean Airlines
ProSieben
Katjes
MLP
EnBW
Swisscom
Jive
Dept of Health-UK (NHS)
Hansgrohe
VisitBritain
Sky
Mars
Kia
Richemont
Bausch & Lomb
Hugo Boss
Sanofi
Unilever
VF Corporation
Globetrotter
Sonepar
Es waren sicherlich noch mehr dabei, diese hier sind mir nur beim kurz darüber Nachdenken eingefallen.
I remember when I created web pages in 1998. With the release of IE4 at that time, it brought a lot of new features and these offered some weird options. We were happy, we were lucky, but for what price?
I’m not sure if I want this. We will have more and more animations and less content. I don’t want to see the repeating animation instead of the content. Maybe funny the first 10 times, but getting boring when you click around for information. Then an even 500ms animation can get useless spent times. And that was, why the page transitions also were not a breakthrough thing.
It also seems to be some kind of duplication of existing features like CSS transitions. Just currently proprietary.
I’m working with Sapient, which is part of the Publicis Groupe, since a couple of years now. In detail already since 2007. You can check out work I do and blog posts I did within my career, following the latest TAG covering Publicis Sapient on this Weblog.
Publicis Sapient also offers nice career paths. I suggest to check out our offers if you want to grow your developer skills or other capabilities with us.
Content Management Systems as we use them today go back to the times when the Internet was invented by Tim Berners-Lee in 1990. Data and Content had to be stored somewhere — and even more important — had to be maintained and updated. Initially, most contents were created like documents, edited, and stored as static pages. This is enhanced with the need for dynamic content, interaction like commenting, or linking.
First CMS were still providing static HTML pages, that were rendered server-side by Script Languages like PHP, JSP, ASP, or other template languages or engines that have been created like TWIG, HTL, or Freemarker. Allowing to interact with the pages with added forms. Nowadays with Node as JavaScript (we cover this later)
This came with some problems as to how HTML is used, contents were only available in one format, and the source was created on a server that did not know anything about the device it was rendered on. With upcoming Mobile, but also other IoT devices it was hard to render this content appropriate on all devices.
CMS and technology timeline
What does this mean?
While the content was rendered into a unique layer of HTML on the server-side, only CSS was able to design this output. There was a hard binding from Content to HTML. This caused less flexibility and relaunch. Or re-using of content created effort in re-creating the server-side rendering. CSS could always re-create new designs with existing content if HTML is written properly. (Examples like CSS Zengarden are showing this for decades) But this heavily depends on semantic Markup and no Elements used that cause already design (like line breaks, <div> containers that represent design or similar).
Nowadays we can adjust layout and design with CSS and Media Queries. There were times when browsers were not supporting this well.
How do traditional CMS monoliths work?
A traditional CMS is a software that you either install and manage yourself or in a managed server environment. Traditional CMS is also known as “monolithic” because they contain all functions and assumptions for working in a single system. Traditional CMS often offers a visual authoring interface for editing content (WYSIWYG), as they only have one context for displaying the content — usually a website. The system normally offers a direct editing layer on an existing rendered layout.
Headless vs monolithic
The headless CMS only contains a data layer and authoring. They provide an API for a headless rendering layer that consumes the data. The aforementioned is also one of the challenges. How can you render a WYSIWYG experience when your authoring system does not know about the rendering?
A new generation of CMS were invented. These often offer additionally Headless on existing systems, like CoreMedia for example, where besides Freemarker Template, a Headless GraphiQL server exists.
How to consume headless data
Headless also provides the possibility to get a content hub to ensure “Content first” implementation. Your one base of content will be able to maintain a bucket of additional endpoints.
The CMS as Content Hub
This data will be consumed via APIs — below are some examples.
Representational state transfer (REST)
Rest API
REST is a software architecture style that defines how to create web services. Web services, which conform to the REST architectural style and are known as RESTful Web Services, provide interoperability between computer systems on the Internet. RESTful web services allow the requesting systems to access and manipulate web resources using a set of stateless operations.
GraphQL
GraphQL
GraphQL is a query language for your API. Also, a server-side connection for executing queries belongs to a type of system to use for your data management. GraphQL is not tied to a personal database or storage engine and is driven by hidden code and data management.
A GraphQL service will have types and fields for those types. There are functions for each field from each type.
This is the rising star, as it offers flexibility not known before.
GROQ
I mention GROQ though it is not really widely used, but as I see similarities to GraphQL worth sharing.
Advantages
Use cases for headless CMS can be the following: You need to build a website with a technology you are familiar with, or web apps that use JavaScript frameworks like VUE, React, Svelte, Web Components, or Angular. Native mobile apps for iOS or Android can be directly consuming content. As you have seen, it’s not limited to websites.
Where headless helps:
Your team is familiar with a special UI Technology.
There is a need for A/B tests
If you require a client-side rendered Framework like VUE, React, etc
Editing your content can be harder for authors on headless systems. Your System is depending on a second screen/system.
Websites created with traditional CMS, allow customizable zones, and authors can resize and rearrange dynamic content easier. They are not limited to edit dynamic data in a fixed zone. They are enabled to share content easier.
With headless, authors often can’t customize the placement or presentation much beyond given forms, without implementing configurable content grids. Dragging and dropping components is getting harder, as the components only exist as data and rely on a presentation layer.
It can be more expensive to implement and the share of costs can get more complicated when only one unique source exists, but multiple layers consume it.
Search Engine Optimization can also be trickier. Server-side Rendering (SSR) needs to be implemented for deep linking. SSR makes it even more complex. There are some advantages with server-side rendered JavaScript, but it is still an effort to consider. Think twice before considering headless. There can be use-cases where all of the above is not relevant. Usage depends.
Conclusion
There is no black and white decision possible. It depends on your team’s skills, your client’s or customers‘ needs, your project setup, and so on. Just make the right decision in the beginning.
A lot of people have asked me in the last few months what has changed since I started working from home “ during these times „. To be honest, almost nothing has changed for me. Most of it has even improved.
Software development is remote work
Because my coding and application building activities have always been done remotely. You rarely have a server right next to you, or even in the same house. I have had teams in the US, UK, India, and Bulgaria for the past 20 years. Suddenly I can no longer travel to these places. Somehow offices are no longer interesting as most employees now work from home. A big change for me as someone who has always traveled at least 2-3 days a week.
The good
My family, my wife, and my daughter finally have me available for 5 days in the afternoon and evening during the week and at the weekend. This sometimes leads to discussions like “ When are you going to travel again? “ – not really because you want to see me travel, the question is more:
“ Does your job really work almost 100% from home? „
To be honest, I was a bit critical at first, but now I fully support this statement. There is practically no difference. Sometimes the sarcastic smile or nod that one does not see on the phone or in the videoconference is missing, but this can be overcome with the help of chat or other techniques.
What has changed?
Before Covid, I mostly spent two to three hours a day with video conferences and tools. Today I spend up to 8 hours a day doing it. This leads to situations where you really miss personal connections – at work, discussions have already begun about how we can adapt and overcome this. The typical elevator speech information is missing.
Seeing a team member reacting to others, talking, or arguing can often shorten the discussion. You know that others think the same way. Online meetings tend to “ beat the dead horse ”, as everyone often wants to be heard. There is no personal interaction.
Lower environmental impact
The biggest change for sure is that I am not traveling and polluting the planet. Before that, I sat on trains 30 to 40,000 km a year. I traveled around the world by air, to India, the USA, or Eastern Europe. This is completely broken away. And I don’t miss any of these hours at the gate, runway, or train station. Sure, I’ve found great places for food or other things all over the world. Cafes or places to buy things. Now I tend to get more local. I hope I can secure that for the future. A big start was that I’ve become a vegetarian since December 2019 and I’m finally trying to break away from other animal products.
Conclusion
There will definitely be times when I have to travel to customers again. I miss the contact with my friends around the world and all over Europe. But this also gave me time to rethink whether everything has to be on site. The time that used to be in trains, taxis, and planes is now used much more productively. Programming, documenting things, and discussing architectures can easily be done in tools like collaboration teams. You only need functioning teams, and I have them.
Maybe interesting for one reading this. I was annoyed by the – on the other hand – impressing Ticwatch Pro 3 GPS, as it always switches on backlight when you turn your wrist. This is great when awaken, but at night wakes me up. Even the DND modus does not help. But here you are, I think this will help you. Till the Firmware is getting updated, we might can live with the following workaround:
Select the Cinema / Kinomodus. The second icon in the lower row. The Watch does not light up anymore. If you want to disable it, press the power button.
Maybe time for some re-thinking about the Chromium based Browser.
As IE had a majority in the 2000 everyone was claiming Microsoft for this and US even acted. Now Chromium has in some countries 95% coverage.
Imagine all cars would come from one base manufacturer. Think of builders that are only allowed to build the surrounding with basics that are “efficient” as this manufacturer defines it (Yes, it is open source, but there are gate-keepers).
Car-Basics
Fixed Speed limit like smart to 145km/h
e-CVT like Toyota
FIAT 2-cylinder Twin Air engine
Only Super Plus allowed for fuelling
Radio is Spotify
…
Horrible, or? But this is what we have currently. Support Mozilla.
At my current employer we do all kind of Web Applications. We call it Experience Technology. These customer user experiences have different needs. Sometimes we do static content deliverables like temporary marketing campaign pages, or knowledge bases that never get touched again. More often we do enterprise shopping experiences, catalogue maintenance, and other e-commerce platforms.
Asking someone of my team how to build their next customer user experience I get named: React, VUE, Svelte or at last, Angular. Normally no one tells me yet: Let’s do it native, let’s use Web Components.
Do I know why?
Maybe
Why the frameworks are so common and preferred is having some reasons:
They offer a community
Searching for an issue or supporting library for sure returns an Stackoverflow entry or an NPM library
There is great support by someone that has „already done this“
For Business: It is good to have something to sell that everyone knows
A quick poll
Doing a quick poll with our experience technologists hardens the opinion.
Showing React 58%, Angular 3%, VUE 15%, Native Web Components 7%. Other 13%
Observing the obvious
Using frameworks and libraries for everything, causes problems that could be prevented. Average weight of a page is increasing. Complexity of generated code too. Views of common frameworks and libraries are often ridiculous complicated and deep nested and adding libraries and grid systems is done with a click. Importing without seeing the direct deeper effect. On top of that, Designers create complex animations and placeholders and forget that we still have low-end devices to support and not an ideal-world fast internet. Accessibility and search, like find-ability is getting worse. When useless containers are nested and semantics are getting lost.
On top of all, GDPR compliance is bad to achieve as of often third parties are used in a way that makes it hard to know where your customers details are getting shared.
This directly leads me to the this ask: Do we at all need to use a framework or library? Can’t we use Web components?
Webcomponents.org tells a clear use case, but why does still no one considers it first place to use it as base in their projects?
Web components are a set of web platform APIs that allow you to create new custom, reusable, encapsulated HTML tags to use in web pages and web apps. Custom components and widgets build on the Web Component standards, will work across modern browsers, and can be used with any JavaScript library or framework that works with HTML. Web components are based on existing web standards. Features to support web components are currently being added to the HTML and DOM specs, letting web developers easily extend HTML with new elements with encapsulated styling and custom behaviour.
Webcomponents.org
Would there be any advantage when using them instead of a framework? Long-term for sure. Imagine a situation where Facebook stops support for React, or Google for Angular. Sooner or later libraries might get outdated. The community for sure support it for some years, but it can stop. There is no guarantee that it works long. There are also new Libraries popping out every day.
As we started writing decoupled user experiences, using micro-services and micro-frontends, we forgot to enable us to create long lasting frontend code, that is maintainable. Instead of using native functionalities, write proper markup and getting accessible and search engine friendly.
We now create a dependency to a framework that is maybe out-dating soon. Any reason to do so?
Not really!
Frameworks and libraries should help us organizing and writing our code and deliverables, but not overtaking our thinking and tooling. It is not reasonable that we deliver whole applications to clients browsers, when the contents never or only every view months change. We should instead build more meaningful smaller applications. We even need to render server side, using JavaScript.
A quick excursion on what Web Components are
Using Web components would allow us to get back to standards, using browser supported simple tooling.
So why should you consider Web components as complement for frameworks and libraries?
Web components are the wrapper name for a set of techniques that create browser rendered interfaces. They are created through custom elements, shadow DOM, HTML templates and HTML modules. The latter is yet not widely adopted by browsers.
Custom Element
Setup a JavaScript file that contains the code for your custom element.
With your custom element you can add coloured text in the context of other text paragraphs. You can capsule your styles that only belonging to the needed node.
Stay DRY. Use HTML templates. Look at the the above example. If you want to render more paragraphs, you can repeat your <p> or just use a <template>. It is obvious what is wet and what is dry.
You can use them together with custom elements and shadow root, or alone.
Take also into account that all is maintained in a component library. Handled in a DSM provided by InVision, Figma, or Design Kits like Sketch. We need to ensure to reuse our code and Styles. Design Tokens help here. Amazon has Style Dictionary, but there are others. And ideally, have a direct connect to your repository. (More would be subject of a full own post)
But my client has IE11 as standard browser!
Ask them why! Seriously!
If they still insist, and maybe even have a dated soon to be replaced Edge: there are Polyfills available, they render the components as HTML for you.
Any other input?
More and more Frameworks and libraries arise that help generating your applications with Web components. They offer build in test ability, design libraries, pattern libraries and more. There are well established ones like Polymer or Stencil. You can find more on the web component page list. So if you do not want to do it manually. Use provided tools.
What to do
There is no golden hammer that makes all your problems a nail. But you should consider re-usability, need of the current implementation, and how long it will exists. Then it can help you making a decision.
Static rendering for interims campaign pages, knowledge bases, and so on can improve SEO, size, and customer experience. Full blown SPA with a checkout or profile management, and a healthy mixture for catalogue can do their part on this.
But the base of all should be a Web component. Just do it.