Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Because everybody is capable of running a JS engine, even on > > computers on which you don't have rights to install something. > > I don't think using JS so heavily without a compelling reason is > really in the WWW spirit. Lots of browsers don't have JS. And lots > of JS is so annoying that some users like to turn it off even in > browsers that have it. I don't have the exact numbers, and I'm pretty certain they'd be confidential if I did, but I believe the factors you mention (browsers completely lacking JS, and users turning JS off), *combined*, still allow JS-rich interfaces to run for well over 95% of visitors to our sites. Maybe that's the key difference between the mindset of a mathematician and that of an engineer -- I consider reaching over 95% of visitors to be _quite good indeed_, while you appear to disagree because of "WWW spirit" issues. Is making a rapidly responsive site (not requiring roundtrips for every interaction) a "compelling reason"? It seems to me that it is -- and why else would one use ANY Javascript, after all? My one issue with the JS/AJAX mania is that I really dislike JS as a language, particularly when you take the mixed mongrel dialect that you do need to reach all the various browsers and releases needed to make that 95% goal. But, alas, there is really no alternative!-( Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list