upvote
By the way, what you're saying isn't true. That link isn't present in either the HTML or the JS, the URL is sent via WebSockets. You had to open the modal to see it.
reply
Modals use JS, that's normal.
reply
It doesn't need to be a modal and can (should!) fall back to a simple <a> without JS. It also didn't work even with JS for me.
reply
First, you're assuming my entire website should work without JavaScript. You don't understand my design reasoning, nor have you asked about the underlying cause.

Second, for a modal, I should use a `<dialog>` that opens via a `<button>`, which it already does. JavaScript does the magic. Not a `<a>` as you suggested.

Finally, if it's a bug, which I find very strange because it's a very simple piece of code and no one has reported it, you're not posting it in the right place. An email or the contact form would have been more appropriate.

reply
I tried manually typing a handful of common feed URLs relative and absolute, a firefox feed auto-finder extension, and a quick ctrl-f for feed in the source. But I guess if running an application is required for your webpages I'm better off not subscribing. That's not my kind of jam but it is understandable if your blog is for profit or it's purpose is to get you a job or something.
reply
That's why I created a modal that explains the different RSS feeds for subscribing and their possibilities. My blog is over a decade old, and I've never used advertising, had sponsored articles, or tried to monetize it (except for asking for donations to maintain the server). I've written freely, sharing knowledge, creating tutorials, and developing courses. Your comment makes me lose the motivation to keep doing it.
reply
I think he just means that you should add an autodiscovery link tag pointing to your RSS feed URL. Then it will automatically be picked up by RSS readers. See https://www.rssboard.org/rss-autodiscovery.

As unnecessarily snarky as this person is being with you, don't let a HackerNews comment stop you from being an great person.

reply
Thank you!
reply
I didn't mean to imply that your blog seemed commercial. I meant that there was no need for commercial patterns on your personal blog like putting links behind JS. Things like that have justification in commerce but rarely in personal stuff so I wanted to leave that conditional just in case your blog was for commerce so as not to offend.

If that's just the way you like things, sure, that's what personal sites are for. How you like it. I apologize for implying otherwise (it must come off that way since two different people took it that way). I just really dislike the web as 'executable application distribution layer' model and try to stick to websites that are HTML pages.

reply
I accept your apology; it must have been a misunderstanding.

I believe that in my case, the use of JavaScript is justified because it's information that doesn't require a separate page; there are just a couple of configuration buttons. On the other hand, the page is rendered using HTML over WebSockets, and what you're experiencing is the vanilla SEO version... hut of course, that's just my opinion.

reply