Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

smashingmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 180 posts

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#131

Post by overcast »

prophesi wrote: post #129
overcast wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, it requires some careful planning. You'd set up the html form with method="post". Then have the AJAX send the request with its content type as "application/x-www-form-urlencoded". At least with Node Express, that will have the requests handled the same.

I understand how this works, I've built a billion products by this point. It's much easier and user friendly to post the form through AJAX, get a JSON response on success or an array of error codes for each field. Dealing with error messages and passing around form information is not something I want to deal with any longer in OG form submit.

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#132

Post by nabla9 »

amiga-workbench wrote: post #56
nabla9 wrote: post #22

http://lite.cnn.io/en https://text.npr.org/ Every site should have a plain html option. Or create their html so that it works fine without js or cnn.

Bring back gopher, then there's no way these script kiddies can muck up the web.

https://github.com/michael-lazar/flask-gopher

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#133

Post by jacquesm »

romaniv wrote: post #43
everdev wrote: post #8

Back in 2006/7 I remember we'd use "progressive enhancement" to make a site work without JavaScript and then add JavaScript enhancements for those who had JS enabled. At some point (maybe after the popularity of Google Maps?) nobody wanted progressive enhancement and it was totally cool to just ignore users who had JS turned off. It made web app development so much easier, but probably less user friendly. It feels li…

>It made web app development so much easier I aim to develop web UIs using (mostly) progressive enhancement. I adopted several practices and developed some libraries supporting this process. As a result: 1. When I need to create something, I know exactly which data structures to use. This is determined by what is available in modern browsers. 2. I can quickly prototype solutions using plain HTML focusing on logic rat…

Thank you!

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#134

Post by zeveb »

jrvidal wrote: post #72
zeveb wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I really hope not. I don't believe we've seen the last of exploits like Spectre & Meltdown. Allowing anyone in the world to execute code on the same machine whose memory contains your bank accounts, your private memos, your passwords &c. will, I hope, come to be see…

I think your fears are a bit misguided. WebAssembly runs within the same sandbox as JavaScript code. I don't see how this would constitute a _higher_ security risk than browsers as they stand today.

WebAssembly isn't a higher risk than JavaScript — what's a higher risk is increasing the use of JavaScript and/or WebAssembly.

I fear that in the not-too-distant future web pages will simply be blobs of WebAssembly which paint UIs within a browser, and general-purpose computers will have become TV terminals — but TV terminals which allow the modern equivalents of networks & newspapers to steal one's private information.

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#135

Post by bahjoite »

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…

The whole point of the article is that not everybody is able to use javascript, for a variety of reasons, and it makes perfect sense for apps to provide as close to equivalent functionality as is practicable.

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#136

Post by prophesi »

overcast wrote: post #131
prophesi wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it requires some careful planning. You'd set up the html form with method="post". Then have the AJAX send the request with its content type as "application/x-www-form-urlencoded". At least with Node Express, that will have the requests handled the same.

I understand how this works, I've built a billion products by this point. It's much easier and user friendly to post the form through AJAX, get a JSON response on success or an array of error codes for each field. Dealing with error messages and passing around form information is not something I want to deal with any longer in OG form submit.

Alright. To each their own.

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#137

Post by jacquesm »

gear54rus wrote: post #90
TeMPOraL wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe some see it as self-centered, but I find it resonates with me strongly. Now that we're a global civilization, life would be much simpler of global-scale things get standardized. Like, if metric system was adopted everywhere. If people used ISO 8601[0] instead of whatever is their random way of writing time down. If people used one well-defined number format. Etc. IMO what's really being self-centered is - when…

How is it self-centered though? There's not 'self' here. My profession (IT) is not the only profession that requires translations. They are required everywhere and so what I am saying is applicable everywhere. My nationality is not in question either, because I am not a native speaker. How is that self centered?

It's self centered because you have already crossed that bridge.

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#138

Post by falcolas »

gear54rus wrote: post #90
TeMPOraL wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe some see it as self-centered, but I find it resonates with me strongly. Now that we're a global civilization, life would be much simpler of global-scale things get standardized. Like, if metric system was adopted everywhere. If people used ISO 8601[0] instead of whatever is their random way of writing time down. If people used one well-defined number format. Etc. IMO what's really being self-centered is - when…

How is it self-centered though? There's not 'self' here. My profession (IT) is not the only profession that requires translations. They are required everywhere and so what I am saying is applicable everywhere. My nationality is not in question either, because I am not a native speaker. How is that self centered?

> How is that self centered?

"I find it to be too much work, and I derive no value from it, so we shouldn't do it."

Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off

#140

Post by NoGravitas »

romaniv wrote: post #101
Androider wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does make development easier, and at some point it just doesn't make sense to support any longer. If the number of people who visit your site with JavaScript disabled is less than the number of people who visit using the Opera browser, does it really make sense to add [number of supported browsers] x [JS on | JS off] permutations to your testing workload? Is spending the time and resources on creating a non-JS sit…

> Is spending the time and resources on creating a non-JS site worth it Comments like these make me wonder if any of the people saying PE is hard ever tried it at all. The whole point of progressive enhancement is that you don't create a separate non-JS website.

Of course they haven't tried it. Some thought leader told them PE was dead (or smelled funny), so they were able to write it off and go ahead with what they wanted to do anyway.
Post reply on HN