[alexpetros]

> Why bother with v4 at all? If it dilutes that simpler interface?

v4 makes almost no changes to the interface, other than to flip inheritance to be off by default.

> I think that even with req/resp morph leads to a simpler majority use case and that's what Turbo and Datastar have both shown. No?

Although you can use the idiomorph extension for htmx, I personally don't think idiomorph is simpler, because there's an algorithm choosing what parts of the page get replaced based on the server response; I prefer to specify exactly what parts of the page get replaced in much simpler terms, a CSS selector, with `hx-target`.

Per [1] above, my style is minimize partial page responses wherever possible, so the ones that I do have are bespoke and replace a specific thing.

[andersmurphy]

Your personal preferences aside. Full page morphs get you back to 3XX redirects of pure HTML (no JS forms) when you use them with req/resp.

https://dev.37signals.com/a-happier-happy-path-in-turbo-with...

[nymanjon]

With highly dynamic page where you would normally start using a front end lib, Idiomorph makes it so you can stick with the hypermedia approach instead.

[nchmy]

Are you aware that v4 is baking idiomorph into the core...?

[alexpetros]

Yes! I expect that I will mostly be sticking to `hx-target` though, for the reasons stated above.

My interest in htmx is more on the coarse-grained aspects of its interface, not the finer ones, which is a consistent theme in my writings about it [0].

[0] https://alexanderpetros.com/triptych/

[andersmurphy]

It's actually baking in datastar morph. Which is even better.