- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0400
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Kornel Lesinski<kornel at geekhood.net> wrote: > <noscript> is a very poor solution, and <nostyle> would be too. You should > use graceful degradation/progressive enhancement instead (in both cases). Graceful degradation is not necessarily possible with JavaScript. For instance, consider a real-time game written in JavaScript. It would be impractical to refresh the page often enough for the game to be playable using server-side scripts alone (not to mention having to rewrite the game in a server-side language). There's nothing to do in such a case except inform the user that they need to enable JavaScript. Of course, this case is atypical. Sometimes <noscript> can be used for graceful fallback, too. For instance, if a script normally generates an element dynamically when needed, the element might be placed statically inside <noscript> so that it always appears if script is disabled. (For instance, a "Nationality" form in a field that only appears if a radio control is changed from the default of "U.S. Citizen".) Without <noscript>, the only way I know of to allow graceful fallback is to do something like hide the element onload, which will make it briefly visible.
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2009 03:51:05 UTC