On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Jonathan Duncan <jonat...@bluesunhosting.com> wrote: > Well said. I agree. The company I currently work at adopted that type of > thinking last year and it is very refreshing. Check out these postings: > > http://mediarain.com/#jobs
Jonathan, Have you looked at that webpage w/o javascript enabled? 1. Using the hash tag for links (especially links meant to be shared) is bad because it doesn't return the data expected. 2. Preventing all data from display w/o javascript is not just limiting your possible viewers, it's just plain rude. Yes, I do agree that most people use browsers with javascript enabled. Yes, the website looks very "hip" with all the javascript fancy-ness. No, it's not that much better than a Flash-only website. Whatever happened to degrading gracefully? It wouldn't be that hard to at least display some of the content w/o javascript. At a minimum, possibly a message explaining what the problem is. Using hash tags for URLs is fine for doing stuff inside a web application, but for use in real document links are bad. Here's a few reasons: http://www.webmonkey.com/2011/02/gawker-learns-the-hard-way-why-hash-bang-urls-are-evil/ http://isolani.co.uk/blog/javascript/BreakingTheWebWithHashBangs </rant> --lonnie /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
