- From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
- Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 08:28:57 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 01:11 PM 01/05/98 +1000, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >A suitable <noscript> would describe what the script does - in this case >'In javascript-capable browsers the active link graphic is highlighted, >analagously to text links changing colour' There is no need to describe every single feature that a user is missing. All this does is say "You're not good enough to see this page as I intended you to see it, but here's a clue." I regularly disable JavaScript to avoid annoying distractions, but that kind of NOSCRIPT adds a worse distraction than unnecessary animations or messages in my status bar. There is no appropriate NOSCRIPT for image rollovers because NOSCRIPT is only useful to provide alternative content for a SCRIPT that generates content. Since the vast majority of SCRIPTs provide dynamic interactivity instead of generating content, the NOSCRIPT element is rarely needed. Bobby is wrong for complaining about a missing NOSCRIPT. That error was based on an earlier version of the Guidelines Working Draft that was also wrong, but has since been corrected. -- Liam Quinn Web Design Group Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development http://www.htmlhelp.com/ http://enhanced-designs.com/
Received on Friday, 1 May 1998 08:29:08 UTC