Hey there,
I have noticed that there are two different versions of "retro web revival" going around at the moment; the retro web revival best exemplified by this site and its community, and the anti-bloat or minimal web (which is not actually the "official" name for it but whatevs) that's a bit smaller but still very much up and coming.
Basically, the
retro web manages to be unique in today's internet because of its return to early 2000s/late 90s web design with flashy colors, a plethora of animated images, tangible design, a rejection of commercialization, a more inclusive community built upon friendship and creativity instead of consumption, and so on. It tends to be administered and used by younger people, tends towards a female and progressive user base, and is largely a part of the queer/neurodiverse community.
Built on similar foundations but with a different execution is what I call the
minimal or anti-bloat web. It's unique in today's internet because it
refuses to use heavy and inaccessible design features and programming frameworks, and instead relies on semantics similar to a forum post:
simple, plain XHTML, some CSS, nothing else. It's basically an internet like you get taught to program in intro to HTML classes; simple <h1>'s, <p>'s, without fancy backgrounds, no GIFs, no text in images, and so on.
For examples, see the
Gemini protocol (a minimal and very tight knit alternative to HTTP(S) and HTML as a whole),
the XHTML club,
my own website, the
FrogFind search engine, the
1MB club,
based.cooking (a recipe site) and
more.
This has a lot of advantages to both the retro web and the modern web:
- Accessible to all browsers: No matter if you browse it on a 1995 terminal in text mode, or on a Chromebook, it will always display and function correctly, as compared to a website with modern HTML5 features, javascript frameworks, embedded junk and so on. I like using text based browsers on computers that don't have a desktop at all, so that's a huge plus.
- Accessible to disabled people and algorithms: Some people cannot rely on their accessibility software and alt-texts to browse the full internet when, for example, text is contained in images and not as actual text, so an XHTML only website will be understood and parsed well by any decent software.
- Accessible to bad internet: You can get websites REALLY small. And to people in less privileged countries than ours, that can make the difference between visiting a page and not being able to do so.
- Customizable: Did you know that browsers used to do all the theming themselves? It was originally up to the browser to make boring old text pages look super fancy, by applying a uniform style to them. Every website could look exactly like you wanted it to, even. This is possible with semantic HTML, because that tells the browser not how to display something, but what it should represent (aka telling it it's a headline, not that it NEEDS to be 15px larger than other text).
On one hand, the retro web such as this site allows for more expression and is simply playful and fun, and it embodies a sense of community and creative outlet that the web has not had in a long time. On the other, the debloated web is more accessible and still has many of the retro web's qualities: nostalgia, expression, anti-commercialization, community, content-based browsing.
Where do you stand on this dichotomy? :O I'd be seriously interested what people think about this development.
Let me point out though that we are allies in disliking the modern web, not rivals, and I'm glad I'm here.
Posts: 99/24hrs 
Check out the new FONTS!!! 
Show Posts
