- From: Peter-Paul Koch <gassinaumasis@hotmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:33:16 +0000
JavaScript turns up regularly in this discussion, so I though I'd state a few obvious points and ask a few questions that nobody else seems to have asked as yet. First of all, when I read the (very interesting) position paper, it struck me that every described feature can be implemented in JavaScript *right now*, maybe except for the server sent events and the clipboard api (but even in those cases it might be possible). Therefore I wondered why we'd have to invent a wholly new language to do what can already be done, especially when we'd have to wait about three to five years before browsers start to support it, and with the extreme likelihood that IE won't support it anyway. As far as I'm concerned we have the choice of using JavaScript right now, or waiting for (probably buggy and incompatible) browser implementations of as yet unknown techniques in the distant future. Of course using JavaScript has a downside, too. My current personal guesstimate is that about 2 to 3 % of the Web users have JavaScript disabled, voluntarily or by Sysadmin Decree. It may be somewhat more or less, but that's not the point. The point is that JavaScript is not 100% reliable. Therefore the question becomes how important JavaScript's imprecise reliability is. This depends on the *purpose* of the Web application, and I haven't yet seen a single mention of this purpose, neither in the position paper nor on this mailing list. I'm confused by the paper's mention of eBay and Amazon as examples of web applications. To me, these are not applications but web sites, and they can function without JavaScript (I'm not saying they do, I'm just saying they can). The core tasks of these sites (bidding on items and buying books) don't require richer widget sets, window-based state management, predefined HTML editors or server-sent events. Any web application that enhances these sites is therefore not critical but a nice extra. Hence the use of JavaScript to program them is quite allowed. Noscript browsers can still perform the core tasks. HTML editors and such are very valuable for content management systems and such, but these applications run in a controlled environment where it is permissible to require a JavaScript enabled browser. So here, too, the use of JavaScript is quite allowed. Can someone please give an example of an application where richer widget sets, window-based state management, predefined HTML editors or server-sent events are *absolutely required*, an application that, when created in JavaScript, *cannot* be designed to degrade gracefully in noscript browsers? I feel that any web application must have a strong server side component, to store the data and to allow people to add, change or delete data. These tasks can be performed in the absence of a rich web application and/or JavaScript, simply by entering the data in a form and clicking "Submit". In short, I don't see any reason *not* to use JavaScript to create a richer client environment. Can somebody please explain why we need a new language? ------------------------------------------------------------------- ppk, freelance web developer Interaction, copywriting, JavaScript, integration http://www.quirksmode.org/ Column "Keep it Simple": http://www.digital-web.com/types/keep_it_simple/ ------------------------------------------------------------------ _________________________________________________________________ Play online games with your friends with MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 9 June 2004 15:33:16 UTC