Error checking I consider housekeeping. I have no problem with javascript on a page so long as any browser can work the page without javascript bitching at people who use browsers that don't support javascript.
-- Jude <jdashiel at panix dot com> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." Ed Howdershelt 1940. On Thu, 21 Sep 2023, Mouse wrote: > > Correctly written web sites use java script for housekeeping behind > > the scenes and nothing more. > > Depending on what you mean by "housekeeping", there's also a place for > optimizations, such as client-side checking of form fields for obvious > errors before submitting the form. (A simple example is checking that > a required field is nonempty.) > > I'd also argue that there can be such a thing as a correctly written > page that actually depends on Javascript. For example, I have a (so > far very partial) card game which is designed to run in-browser, with > the client side being written in JavaScript. Turn off JavaScript and > it won't work, yes, but I see that as no different from, say, something > written in Python failing to run for lack of a Python interpreter. > > The problem, to my mind, arises when a page could degrade gracefully > when faced with lack of JS, but doesn't. > > I'm not sure how I feel about things like, say, "Enable JavaScript to > see comments on this post" when it could be done but, in the opinion of > the page's provider/author, just isn't worth the resource investment. > > /~\ The ASCII Mouse > \ / Ribbon Campaign > X Against HTML mo...@rodents-montreal.org > / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B > >
