I think that a non JS dependent version of document that is essentially words, is reasonable. I disagree with it being justified in terms of it being an accessibility requirement. Non JS based content being specifically required for users with disabilities is a requirement with no basis. -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 14 July 2014 19:47, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com> wrote: > is there a law or regulation that requires scripting for the web? Who > enforces this? > > Isn’t there a lot of legacy of both sites and devices? > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch, Nokia > Chair DAP > @fjhirsch > > > > On Jul 14, 2014, at 1:50 PM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On July 14, 2014 at 12:09:31 PM, Shane McCarron (shane@aptest.com) > wrote: > >> Well, first, any UA may have JS disabled. > > > > The Web depends on scripting, it's not something you can just "turn off" > and expect that it will work. A UA that doesn't support scripting is not a > conforming UA (i.e., the vendor should be encouraged to fix that, or users > should be encouraged to use a modern web browsers). > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 14 July 2014 19:19:59 UTC