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.