Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

Post by gramstrong » Tue, May 08, 2018, 4:42 PM UTC

wgerard wrote: post #13

staticelf wrote: post #2

I like that he offers solutions but honestly, more people are vision impaired than have javascript disabled so instead of doing all that work instead put it first on helping people with disabilities. > There is a danger that more and more sites will require JavaScript to render any content at all. What danger, exactly? While some sites that don't require a lot of js is nice you will soon notice that many sites you wa…

> I personally think that WebAssembly is the future so the web will finally just be another compilation target and I can't wait for it to be wide spread. Hmmm, I'm not sure about that. I've only done toy projects with WebAssembly, so I could easily be missing something, but it seems to be: 1) Overkill for most websites 2) Significantly more complicated than current web development - which is saying something given th…

Post by ry_ry » Tue, May 08, 2018, 4:55 PM UTC

80386 wrote: post #111

ibdf wrote: post #39

Oh my lord, this article is non-sense. Had you gone to a website and had not been able to read anything I would say... good point. But you went to a Wordpress admin to prove your point. Lord have mercy... you're really going to hate your experience once WP switches to a JS based editor. Quick, let's try using Facebook and other apps built on JS frameworks and complain about the functionality not working. Let's try se…

I know a guy who built a single-page web app for a blog. Really. It takes a few seconds to load the post titles, it'll make your computer grind to a halt if you have more than two tabs of it open, it took months to write, and it doesn't do anything you couldn't do with plain HTML and some AJAX request handlers... but Brawndo has electrolytes! I bet it looks pretty good on his resume.

Post by jwilk » Tue, May 08, 2018, 4:58 PM UTC

rattaz wrote: post #113

gear54rus wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

English obviously. It is quite far fetched, but I'm just tired of seeing countless hours wasted because the numbers aren't localized properly or RTL breaks layout. It's superfluous, people should have their native tongue and should learn English as means of international communication. Also imagine encoding problems which are also great PITA going away with ascii-only technologies.

Do you speak one language only? Even one additional language would change your perspective here. You won't be able to translate all that properly into one language. A people's language is a window into their culture and their being. Each language (and even dialect) have their own insightful and delightful quirks. I could only lamely elaborate here on own experience.

Post by textmode » Tue, May 08, 2018, 5:02 PM UTC

Post by prophesi » Tue, May 08, 2018, 5:22 PM UTC

overcast wrote: post #126

prophesi wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if I follow? For a form submission, you'd set it up like a normal HTML form. The would do it's regular thing. If Javascript is enabled, then you'd hijack the button with event.preventDefault and do your AJAX.

If I'm client side, as well as server side checking inputs with JSON responses, there is going to be overlapping of work. Particularly annoying when carrying over field/errors across submit pages. Old school submit, check, refresh, show errors, is an ugly experience for end users. Of course it can be done, not something I'm going to worry about as a solo operating and developing multiple ventures.