[Bug 10068] Suggest making noscript obsolete but conforming

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10068





--- Comment #18 from Lee Kowalkowski <lee.kowalkowski@googlemail.com>  2010-07-07 15:43:45 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> You don't need JS for this -- if you're creating a game, you're most likely
> going to be opening the game in a separate page or space anyway. 

That's a weird assumption.

> Before you
> provide the link to the game, you're going to tell people what they need.
> That's just good commonsense design.

You do understand that the game can be linked to from anywhere on the internet
or even bookmarked?  You still need the "requires javascript" fallback in the
same response.

> Then they can provide a block of text as default in the page to print the page
> using the print facility, and overlay the block with JS or enable it with JS if
> JS is detected. 
> This is the basis of progressive enhancement.

I understand progressive enhancement!  What I don't understand is why you
assert that noscript is not a valid progressive enhancement technique when
falling back to zero-functionality.

> What Gez is saying, and I agree with, is that the use of noscript is inherently
> bad by default. It encourages bad behavior, it simplifies bad behavior, it is
> used by developers as a way of routing around good development practices.

If noscript never existed, we wouldn't be any better off.  Not providing
noscript doesn't imply that bad developers automatically will adopt best
practice.  Bad developers will just do nothing, which is worse.

-- 
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, 7 July 2010 15:43:47 UTC