W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: to js or not to js?

From: Julian Voelcker <asp@tvw.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:35:00 GMT
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-Id: <VA.0000062a.0605e1fe@tvw.net>

Hi Jim,

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:48:25 -0000, Jim Ley wrote:
> but equally you have the fact that it's getting increasingly easy to disable
> javascript on a per function/method basis, so it's not now (not that it's
> ever been for clueful developers) possible to say "enable javascript" and
> this will work.  It's enable javascript configured in a certain way, and as
> long as there aren't any javascript bugs we're okay.

To be honest, I didn't realise that you could change the js settings on a per 
function basis.  Whilst it sounds like a good idea, it also seems like a 
recipe for disaster and something that no developer on earth would be able to 
handle unless they dropped js altogether, which I don't see happening.

> I imagine what you're actually saying is, use IE (and maybe mozilla) in
> default configuration with javascript enabled and it will work.  If I turn
> up with my javascript enabled Netrik or Pogo it'll likely just error, or if
> I disable a few functions in IE (like .open() .focus() etc.) it'll also not
> work.

I don't think developers should take the blame if you get a lot of js errors 
because you either use a browser that doesn't fully support javascript or you 
start limiting the support.

Cheers,

Julian Voelcker
Received on Sunday, 19 January 2003 19:35:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:08 GMT