2011/12/16 E. Liddell <ejlddll@...>: > On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:55:47 +0100 > L0ner sh4dou <sh4dou@...> wrote: > >> 2011/12/16 Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey@...>: >> > >> > >> > On 16 December 2011 11:27, E. Liddell <ejlddll@...> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:20:11 -0500 >> >> Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey@...> wrote: >> >> >> >> > On 15 December 2011 19:45, L0ner sh4dou <sh4dou@...> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Not using databases is a big problem, since it practically constrains >> >> > > you to use static pages. >> >> > > >> >> > Basically - why is is this so bad? >> >> >> >> Depends on what we're trying to achieve. Dynamic pages ease certain >> >> types of collaboration and user-added content, but static pages are not >> >> intrinsically evil and put less of a load on the server. >> > >> > >> > Both can be good, If anything I'd do a bit of both. >> > >> > Simple php/html + a commenting system. >> > >> > here is a good example of very basic and yet has dynamic elements: >> > http://incise.org/htpicker.html >> >> It uses disqus for the comments, for which I have mixed feelings. I'd >> rather not relay on external services for parts of the website. > > I think Calvin was advocating the general concept, not the specific > implementation. I'm sure we can find an open-source, locally-hostable > comment system that requires only PHP, HTML4/XHTML1, and > CSS<=2 (and if we can't, I'm sure I'm not the only one here > capable of creating such a system if it turns out to be both useful > and necessary). > That would be nice.