Really: just transmit the data necessary to convey your information. Your app is in the way.
wttr.in on Android using Termux is actually pretty awesome.
The site is also unusable on mobile, because ASCII art unlike proper semantic HTML is not easily rescalable by the browser. And it's inaccessible by users relying on screen readers, ironically because of all the ASCII cruft.
As web developers, we're used to "everyone" being the audience, but that's not the case here. As a stylized visual representation of the weather, it's fine. I dig it.
Making sure something is accessible to screen readers is generally an important thing (and could be worked on here) but I give this project a pass because the visual design is the whole point of the exercise.
And while I viewed this on mobile (and was fine for me with zooming), that clearly isn't the audience. Again, it could be improved if the author felt like it, but even if "fixed" (perhaps having morning, noon, evening, night being stacked vertically on mobile) I don't think this would be hardly anybody's goto weather reference on mobile. It's meant for us desktop users who are lovers of the terminal aesthetic.
I'm pointing out that the grandparent's comment about this being minimalistic, and comparing it to real weather apps as being absurd. If you're building a toy project aimed solely at programmers on desktop, there's a lot of things you don't have to care about. Some of those things are exactly the 'bloat' the grandparent has been complaining about.
Not everyone wants their webpages to be seen on mobile, this one works perfectly in lynx. Does your website work in lynx?
I would think screen readers would have no impact. Text is pretty much text (utf8, etc...) and the scaling is handled by your font choice not your text choice.
Screen readers depends on the semantics as defined in HTML to recognize what to read. In this case when you use text to define the 'layout' of the page, screen readers loses the ability to differentiate between content and presentation. This is also one of the reasons why using tables for layout is a bad idea.
The accessibility issue would be resolved by using workarounds typical of screen-reader solutions: ARIA markup, tricks like Bootstrap's .sr-only class, etc. At the end of the day, neither images nor ASCII art are going to be accessible, so if you implement the required accessibility functionality, theoretically there is no difference between them. I do shudder to imagine just how ugly the source would look (hide every character of the nonsensical ascii from screen reader, and replace it with proper text representation).
Bootstrap's screens reader only classes are somewhat of a hack, and does the opposite of what you're suggesting anyway (aria-hidden is the proper way to go, but as you said that will mean adding a ridiculous amount of markup to the page), while images support screen readers natively via the alt attribute - no messy markup needed.
Contrast ~6 - 60 for a typical web page these days (and yes, Firefox appears to be part of the problem, but I'm willing to trade a lot of speed for utility).
And the same control extends to users on the Web at the very least. Userstyles/scripts and extensions can modify websites, giving users the ultimate control over website content.
My point was in response to the grandparent's statement that most modern apps get in the way of the user - those exact same things are also crucial to, for instance support screen readers and mobile users.
I use this on my computers at work. Its wego and the ONE frustrating thing is you can't change the colors so that they work well with a light background.
white-space: nowrap; }
What is that cruft at the bottom of the page?
Also, I would prefer this as a CLI application, not as a webpage. Further it should have flags that make its output more friendly to further processing (e.g. grep).
Otherwise, nicely done.
 i.e. http://emojipedia.org/fog/ etc
the rule of of diminishing return applies.. at some point, the usability shortcoming of ascii interface out weights the payload penalty
I don't use it much but there are times when it's faster and cleaner than any other alternative. It often actually is superior to GUI presentation, except for the annoying tendency of text to run into the gutter.
I've been kicking around an idea for a FYWD browser. That might stand for Fine Young Western Dinosaurs or Fuck Your Web Design. It would offer a standard format, non-JS, uniformly presented readable Web page. Not intended for apps, but a sane set of presentation defaults for a given site.
Site-offered CSS would be ignored (or at best strongly deprecated). Straight-bog HTML 1 / HTML5 sites should render best. User could opt for specific stylesheets (e.g., night mode, large/small font), provided _locally_.
It'd be aimed at reading.
Something like Reader Mode on Safari or Firefox, but enabled by default.
(I use the latter, often intercept loading pages to hand-type in "about:reader?url=" before they fully load.)
Some other bits in mind as well, sort of mulling over the concept for now.
This codepen shows what a few basic rules can provide. Doesn't take much to make that work across a wide range of display sizes.