Static sites for small organisations
A while back I wrote about how great traditionally static (not SPAs or jamstack) sites are. I’ve had the work site go down a couple of times in the last month and I do think for small or medium size orgs on a small budget, these are a very good thing indeed. At the very least they keep small web teams sane.
Consider subscribing to the RSS feed. That way, you’ll get notified whenever I post anything new. If you’re not sure about RSS feeds, I wrote a guide to RSS.
Wrong Guardian headlines Previous note
Next note Staves
Add a comment
Comments are currently closed.
Comments and replies to this post from other sites and services, such as micro.blog and Mastodon.
@leonp The points you make here seem very sensible to me! I have sometimes wondered about small businesses, and how viable it can be for them to manage these heavy dynamic websites. Of course many of them would need some way to enable, say, online ordering, but it still seems like they should benefit from lighter-weight and more stable set-ups, with dynamic includes only for the sections that really need it. 🤔
@jayeless yes. We’re in a bit of an odd position. The library service here has been divested from council control – normally you’d have the whole council web/IT department to support the library website. Instead, it’s me and an editor, for a relatively high traffic site.
In this instance I think a proper static site is really worth considering as we just don’t want the hassle of 500 errors, for example. We do actually have a small shop, which we just use Big Cartel for.