I personally use Urchin web stats on all of my sites. As part of it, it has some JS that creates cookies which are available immediately to a CF page. So the visitor hits the page, the urchin code kicks off and sets a domain cookie. You can then check for the existence of it in the cookie scope. If it doesn't exist you can assume that JS is disabled.
Martin Parry http://www.beetrootstreet.com -----Original Message----- From: Dawson, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 October 2005 13:39 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Thoughts on Requiring Javascript How do you handle non-JS users, technically? Let's say you have a page that requires JS. Do you immediately redirect them (using JS) to a JS-enabled page and then leave the others with <noscript>? Or, do you keep the JS and non-JS content on the same page? Thanks M!ke ________________________________ From: Bobby Hartsfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat 10/15/2005 9:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Thoughts on Requiring Javascript Internally as you've said... I'd say, "Sorry, you need JS" To an extent, I would do it on many external sites as well. Sometimes budget doesn't give room to do two versions of specific components so the client needs to decide which is more important to them. Global usability or flare for the masses. If budget does allow it, I usually write 2 versions. (provided that the site isn't dependant on something like milonic menu throughout anyway) Of course, you are already running blackboard (I feel for you) and users must have JS for 95% of that anyway so why not an intranet? On a different note, I found so many bugs in Blackboard, it wasn't even funny! SQL Injection heaven. You could mimic the data structure and half the code simply from error messages in that thing! ....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. Bobby Hartsfield http://acoderslife.com -----Original Message----- From: Dawson, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 9:31 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: SOT: Thoughts on Requiring Javascript I'm interested in what you think of requiring JS for a web site. What is the current mentality on JS? I know that to use Gmail, Google Maps and, in our case, Blackboard Learning System, you must enable JS. I would love to get more into AJAX to make my pages easier to build and use, but I'm afraid I may alienate some people. I will say, that as an educational institution, we have some people that will disable JS, but it should be a minimal amount. Let's say that I do require an extensive amount of JS on my site (it will be an intranet), then how far do I go to support non-JS users? Let's also say I create a form that lets me look up a user based on their ID number, name or email address. AJAX will make this task very easy. However, if a person disables JS, should I bother to create a non-JS version of the page? I'm just curious in how far you go to require JS and, if you do, do you give an alternative other than "Sorry, this page requires javascript"? Thanks ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:221188 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
