I posed this question on another site:
I would prefer to focus on the technologies listed above and I often present myself as a front-end developer however it’s clear that those technologies are barely afterthoughts in front-end development communities. Which always leads me to wonder if I am mistakenly associating those techs with the title.
Should there, or is there, a different title for people focused on those technologies?
So no opinions on those technologies? It’s so rarely ever discussed I wonder if it’s even considered a part of front-end development.
WebGL, Web-Audio, Web-MIDI, and these other obscure APIs are not popularly a part of front-end development. Front-end development is almost entirely defined by business need which is why a task runner like Gulp is more immediately included under the umbrella of front-end development before WebGL. (I understand Gulp is not required but I’m speaking about the business expectations that exist.)
These APIs I list should fall under a different category. Here is what is unique about the three I list: they are each cross-disciplinary. The average web developer doesn’t touch web-audio because it requires an understanding of digital audio and audio synthesis–who here understands FM synthesis AND javascript closures?
Combine these APIs with a knowledge of Javascript and you have a cross-disciplinary practice.
I think this issue requires some reflection for a few reasons. These APIs are ignored (compared to other parts of front-end development) because they’re improperly framed as just web related technologies. This framing occurs when they’re tossed under the title of “front-end development” but they’re ignored like redheaded step children. They should not be considered front-end technologies anymore since front-end is instantly defined by business pressures.
Let’s acknowledge this: front-end development is 100% defined by business needs and expectations.
In the communities I work in I know many digital audio specialists who don’t even see web-audio on their radar but could offer a lot of knowledge and contribution. I suspect they ignore it because of it’s cross-disciplinary nature. “I’m a digital audio specialist who programs in C. Why do I want to learn Javascript in order to work with audio?”
WebGL has made much more progress for the obvious reason that most users prefer visual experiences rather than audio-based ones. But again, I never, never see a discussion of webGL in front-end development communities. It’s the cross-discipline curse again. The average Javascript developer is not specialized in OpenGL and has rare incentive to work with that API.
As an artist, designer, and programmer I find these APIs have been kludged into an industry that has little concern over it. I can rarely find anyone to discuss these APIs. Even though some of you may still hold an ideal definition of “front-end development” I think we need to considered the reality of the industry.
These APIs need a new category. A new title. Something like Front-End Designer or Front-End Experience Developer or Creative Web Developer. Something.
To clarify, I think a new title is necessary in order to promote those APIs and concentrate a clear community to discuss it. The fact is I want to work with these APIs more for the sake of my own learning and creative practice. I am not driven by business needs.
I have not been able to find anyone on hashnode or sitepoint to discuss these APIs. Some people I know who specialize in WebGL would never want to call him/herself a front-end developer so that’s another reason for a new category name.
I have trouble with “job titles”. On the one hand I imagine most employers want “this is your title, and I want you to do all these things”. On the other hand is the employee that wants “this is my title, and I am only responsible for doing these things”
In other words, the employer wants the most product for the least money and the employee wants the most money for the least product. Using a job title to draw the line in the tug-of-war seems like a very grey line at best.
It’s more than a job title. It’s a community title. The field is dramatically defined by business pressure. Do you see other ways web developers–who focus on client-side programming–can define their area of research? That’s the crux of my argument. The definition doesn’t deal with certain APIs appropriately but it is so far the only term we have.
You’re so far one of the few people, out of multiple sites, to respond to my concern here. It’s professionally and intellectually very frustrating. So I appreciate you humoring me. I am an artist and designer who programs. These APIs are very significant but they are barely recognized as relevant to most people. It’s tough when people don’t care about your area of research, you know?
Yes, I can relate. There is so much happening so fast it’s dizzying. eg. AJAX was possible long before it became ubiquitous. I think for anything to become mainstream first someone needs to do something groundbreaking with it, then it needs to be noticed and appreciated as something worth doing. Eventually, if enough work with it then it has a better chance of being recognized as a skill worth having. Until that happens it is just “interesting, but meh, so what” and not likely to get its rightful place in any particular skill category be it Front End, Media Specialist, whatever.
If these are a burning passion for you, perhaps you could start a site or blog and build a community of others with a similar interest?
That’s certainly what I’m considering. I am a creative coder and there are many creative coding sites popping up but most don’t focus on browser based experiences yet. I also work in other technologies like Processing and Max/MSP.
And that sort of seems subjective. I understand but some fantastic work has been done with webGL and web-audio. Not too many people look for it and I guess… since many people focus on smartphone based experiences, you can’t get the full scope of what’s available. Maybe I’m getting old. I still enjoy desktop experiences.
If most people aren’t using something, perhaps it’s not widely needed? I don’t think it’s worth obsessing over names and titles, as they’re not very useful. The real question is, What are you competent in? Just list what you’re good at and be done with it. “Front-end developer” is basically a signpost to the general area you work in. If someone’s called a “plumber”, it doesn’t mean they’re experienced in all the various things plumbers might do. So if you’re looking for a specialist in something, google it.
I’d say to be called a front-end dev, you need some grasp of HTML, CSS and JS, which are the main technologies involved with the front end. Everything else is nice to have. There are sometimes attempts to describe those who cover a field completely, like “full stack front-end developer”, or maybe “front-end unicorn” (I just made that up), but I don’t find them very convincing. It’s unlikely anyone would have every possible front-end technology under their belt.
I completely agree that these APIs are not widely needed. My interest however is part professional and part intellectual. I want to find the small community out there that is focused on these technologies in order to learn from them–if possible.
I think my frustration with that title is that I’ve tried to participate in front-end dev communities and I’m generally unable to find people involved with those technologies. Again, I want to talk shop and learn. A part of me realizes why–the cross discipline issue. That’s why I wonder if a different title would be useful to differentiate the few people focused on audio-visual tools for the web.
Sure. Make one up and start to write about it, maybe start a forum, create a site etc. That’s probably how most things get going. 
I like that idea. Give it a catchy acronym that’s easy to remember. eg.
Media Utilization Techniques Trainer - MUTT 
Or a more descriptive acronym for a Web Media Designer (not developer)?
WMD 
(Please don’t search that.)
Exactly. One term that is slowly making traction is creative coding but it mostly relates to non-web technologies, strangely.
Hm, I guess it is “creative coding” - https://www.reddit.com/r/creativecoding/
That term used to only apply to a limited collection of assumptions (non-web) but it looks like the community has broadened. So that’s the term. So nevermind.
One of the people who popularized the term was an old professor of mine from a decade ago. At the time it was very closely associated with his language, Processing and a few other technologies. WebGL wasn’t around nor was web-audio so that’s probably creative coding as a community wasn’t immediately inclusive of browser technologies.
I would be confused if the term was used to describe web media development. Because, outside that reddit community, the term “creative coding” seems not to be associated particularly with web media technologies (yet) but more commonly used as a term for computor art of all kinds.
I think that it is the very broad word “coding” that bothers me, I would better understand a term that had “web” or “media” in it, like “creative web coding” or “web media developing”. Perhaps that’s just me, due to not being in web media or going to hire one anytime soon.
By the way, thanks for an interesting topic.
Yeah, I sort of agree. I feel similarly but it sounds like we’re on the same page. Creative web development. Creative media development. Somewhere around there.
This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.