- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:06:40 -0700
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi WAI-IG, This was originally posted (by me) on TRACE's 508 list, and David Poehlman suggested it could be useful to some people here, so here it is: At 10:23 AM 7/13/2001 , Liz Roberts wrote: >Why is JavaScript relied on so heavily at the 508 Universe site? >What is the value of having JS when it seems server side could deliver the >same content and functionality in a more reliable, smaller, (and from what I >can see) flexible way? I can't speak for the 508 Universe site, but I can tell you why JavaScript is used even when there are perfectly reasonable and far more universal server-side solutions. Simply: JavaScript is easier for the developer. (Back to user-centric vs. developer-centric AGAIN!) Why is it easier? 1. A developer can write JavaScript without access to a server; this means she can learn it, and create it, with just a web browser and her web editor. (To do server-side coding she needs a web server!) 2. JavaScript "feels" more universal to the developer, because she doesn't have to worry about what server it runs on. If she writes an application in JavaScript, she can put it on ANY web server out there and the specifics of the server type and configuration are not a variable. (Server-side coding is very dependent upon the type of server you're running on -- is it Apache? Is it IIS? Is it on Unix, on NT? Etc.) 3. Server-side programming is slightly more difficult to learn than JavaScript, and may involve dealing with configuration variable and commands and stuff, rather than just things which happen inside the browser. So this is why JavaScript is routinely used instead of a more universal server-side approach. But is it right? I say no -- because basically what you're doing here is making a decision that the developer's convenience is at the center of the universe, and not the user. That is very dangerous and is the cause of web sites failing to deliver, because they become narcissistic exercises which forget their purpose and who they are trying deliver services to. --Kynn PS: I'm not against JavaScript or client-side coding at all; I am simply against JavaScript or client-side coding which is chosen _only_ because it makes some web developer's job easy at the expense of the user's convenience and reliability of access. It is _perfectly_ possible to create user-centric JavaScript which is accessible and usable -- all it requires is the right mindset in which the needs of the many (the users) are -not- outweighed by the needs of the few, or the one (the developer). My beef is with any sort of developer-centrism, not with JavaScript itself. -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com/ Technical Developer Liaison, Reef http://www.reef.com/ Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet http://idyllmtn.com/ Online Instructor, Accessible Web Design http://kynn.com/+d201
Received on Sunday, 15 July 2001 13:07:49 UTC