Ask HN: What is the word for reinventing browser features in JavaScript
Client is building a single-page web application using some framework, and normal browser conveniences (like back/forward navigation, direct links to content, etc.) are not supported. Users complain about not being able to navigate back and forth through screens easily, or go directly to a certain screen they need to go to. Developers go about recreating these lost features using copious amounts of client-side code.
How would you describe, politely, what is going on here? Is there an industry standard terminology that is understandable by all?
(
8 comments
| 2 points
| on HN
)
You could describe it in sentences though. Like, breaking standard browser features is not a good thing. Also it's really really hard but still possible to create single page applications that don't break those features and support direct links and back/forward buttons and everything.
So in a way they are being lazy or biting more than they can chew.
Some browser features are not used for a good reason. The Alert, Prompt, and Confirm popups for example block the whole browser -not just the current tab- because they're older than tabs.
You raised a good point about alert dialogs and it helped me refine my thoughts. Sometimes it's actually worth it to "reinvent" browser features. I don't know anyone who thinks that alert dialogs are good UX. So "reinventing the wheel" doesn't work here because it's too broad.
I found the concept I was looking for, and it's called "perceived affordances" vs. "false affordances." A perceived affordance is any sort of intuitive, visual clue that a user can perform an action. For example, text that is blue and underlined lets a user know it is a link that can be clicked. A false affordance is a perceived affordance that is not real. For example, a back button that does not do the intuitive function of taking you one screen back is a false affordance.