- From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:43:30 +0100
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:15:34 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Jim Ley wrote: > > That's just ridiculous, if any application has a requirement to > > degrade nicely, then just saying "this application uses javascript so > > doesn't have to" isn't something I can agree with I'm afraid. > > It's worth noting that the person you are disagreeing with is representing > the opinion of a Web application provider. Which I also am... In fact that's the only reason I'm participating - out of commercial interest, on a personal level I have little motivation to be here (unlike the other standards related work I participate in) > If application providers > consider that compatibility with non-JS browsers (and browsers with JS > disabled) is not critical, then that is an important datapoint. It is, unfortunately, it's also something that won't fly in the application world of the EU, where anti-discrimination employment laws will cripple any attempt to have this fly - I realise as a non EU national and an employee of a non-EU corporation you may not realise this, but the EU market is too important to web-applications to the most of us to consider anything we can't use in that environment. Jim.
Received on Saturday, 11 September 2004 08:43:30 UTC