- From: Kornel Lesinski <kornel@ldreams.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 17:12:34 +0100
On Mon, 30 May 2005 08:14:05 +0100, Anne van Kesteren <fora at annevankesteren.nl> wrote: > He's correct for a bit though. If you have the following element: > > <div id="noscript"> > <p>Foo bar, etc.</p> > </div> > > You could easily remove that DIV from the flow using javascript. And > when javascript is disabled it would show up. Of course, compared to > NOSCRIPT this is suboptimal at best. I don't see many real uses for <noscript>. Mostly because <noscript> is very primitive: * doesn't work when script-aware browser lacks neccessary DOM or XMLHTTPRequest support. * doesn't let you reuse its contents, so that's always "wasted" bandwidth (browsers don't put contents of <noscript> in DOM tree) * doesn't work with multiple script types Today most scripting solutions use progressive enchacement and don't need <noscript> at all. Decent dynamic menus work by transforming nested lists of links. Maintaince of <noscript> alternative would be wasted effort. sFIR and flashObject degrade nicely without <noscript>. Actually you don't have to look far - entire WebApps specification is designed this way! -- regards, Kornel Lesinski
Received on Monday, 30 May 2005 09:12:34 UTC