- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 18:45:13 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10068 --- Comment #65 from Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3cbug@gmail.com> 2010-08-25 18:45:11 --- (In reply to comment #63) > It's simple enough to provide fallback content that is removed with JavaScript > without the need for a noscript element: > > Markup: > <div id="nojs"> > <h2>JavaScript Required</h2> > <p>Unfortunately, Javascript is required to use this application. > Alternatively, you can use the <a href="...">Flash version of XYZ</a> or <a > href="...">some other version</a> of the game we have lovingly prepared for > you.</p> > </div> > > JavaScript: > var objRemove = document.getElementById('nojs'); > objRemove.parentElement.removeChild(objRemove); Then the content will briefly appear on page load before disappearing. You could solve this by something like <script>document.write("<style>.nojs { display: none }</style>");</script> and then use class="nojs", but <noscript> is easier and more standard, and has no disadvantages that I'm aware of. The major use-case here is something like a game that can have no meaningful graceful degradation -- what's the point in forcing authors to roll their own <noscript> in that case? As your code demonstrates, non-<noscript> ways to do this are likely to be buggy or flawed. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2010 18:45:15 UTC