RSS, anyone?
Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
91–100 of 180 posts
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#92Back 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 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…
Firefox was amazing tech that changed how many of us used the web. Competition is good for the web. Hopefully they take back market share.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought progressive enhancement. I think people expect much more interactivity now, (I think google maps was a driver and web based email as well), so it became harder to do pure back end. For example a lot of the queries I run now show a dynamically generated graph. I can do that on the back end, but much easier to use a javascript charting package. I guess I could just use javascript all the way down
If your page consist solely on a dynamically generated graph, it's OK for it to not show anything with JS disabled. If you have other content though, it's not OK to not show anything; only the graph should be missing without javascript, the rest of the page should still render.
>If your page consist solely on a dynamically generated graph
You can put data for the graph into a table, then use a script to render that table as a graph. If people cared enough, graph libraries could expect heir data in table format.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#94Install uBlock Origin and do it every day! I block all JavaScript, then re enable it when needed to fix a site. Often I just need to enable 1st party scripts in the uBlock Origin grid to fix it. Make sure you enable advanced mode to see the grid.
If you're serious about giving this a whirl, uMatrix is even better for fine-grained control. I disable everything except first-party images and CSS by default and it's like a whole new internet. There's a bit of a dance you have to get used to when things don't work, but I've got it into muscle memory now so I don't even think about it. I tend to click around in there enabling the first few obvious things for about…
+1 for uMatrix. It can be annoying at times, but it is a very powerful tool.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#95I'm glad he can code his brochureware site with minimal impact when JS is disabled. It is 2018 and every site is driven by JS, not just DOM events. If you disable JS, you know what you're getting into. Do we need to develop for those that decide to block CSS? Insist on deprecated browsers? You develop for your audience.
So you've never heard of the CSS naked day? Or visually impaired users and accessibility?
I disable css when it's some article with some annoying low contrast.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#96Back 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 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, or would it better spent somewhere else (usability, accessibility, etc.)?
Even a naive approach to making a javascript-rich site render with JS turned off will have profound positive impacts on usability and accessibility, so I'd say it's still worth it.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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? If your site doesn't work for people with JS disabled, you're unlikely to see significant traffic from people with JS disabled.
Also, if you use JavaScript trackers instead of server logs, guess which group won't show on those trackers at all...
Most trackers have a way to handle non-JS clients by rendering a tracking pixel - a solution that has been out there for a long time now.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#98As much as I'd love for the majority of JS to go away, there is no denying the usefulness of AJAX in web forms. Doing page submit is not a better experience for the user or the developer. That's basically the only piece that I can't see going without.
Yeah, I only want Javascript for when it actually speeds up a site. Which, from my experience, is simply: AJAX for all form submissions Service Worker for caching Turbolinks[0] for page navigation And those are easy to implement as progressive enhancements. If JS is disabled, the submit button does a regular page submit, the Service Worker is simply not registered and instead uses your web server's cache policy, and…
Honestly wouldn't bother with forms failing over. That sounds like double the work to support a few people. If you want to participate, enable JS, otherwise view the site as read only.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is some of the most self-centered reasoning I've seen on HN. Everyone should learn English to reduce your workload. It's almost a caricature of the stereotypical redneck who has never left the country and gets mad when they overhear someone speaking Spanish at Fiesta, muttering "but this is America " under their breath.
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…
Mmmmm, lexicographically sortable. I prefer the RFC3339 profile, but YES to ISO-8601 for anything meant to be readable by a human. It's loony how many different formats are in use on the wire and internally in programs.
Re: Using the Web for a Day with JavaScript Turned Off
#100I am not a developer, I can write just html+css. For my personal website (http://mrtno.com/) I use just static pages written by hand. No JS needed, no stupid complexities.
I wonder why if I can sell my lack of skill on the market... because the skilled designers/coders are programing a web that really has a tendency to be so bloated.
I browse the web with no-script (firefox extension); and many websites won't even load without scripts. I wonder why. For many many website I don't see the need to have JS around at all.
Can the lack of skills be a skill? :) hire me!