Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice?

On 14 December 2012 14:59, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

> Taking the inadequate analogy further, asking for sites not to use JS at
> all because some users may not have readily available user agents that can
> deal with it properly is more akin to asking for all buildings to be flat,
> ground-level, as some people may not be able to use the ramps...
>

Or, we could look at it from the point of view that the stairs is the
JavaScript that enables technologies likes AJAX to enhance the experience
for 75% of users. A quick way to get to the top of the stairwell. I can
skip up the three or fours steps with almost no effort in a few seconds.
But if I can't use the stairs, then the ramp enables me, the remaining 25%
to also have access to the service. Some users may have the means to afford
battery operated wheelchairs; they'll require less effort. Others can only
afford hand-driven wheelchairs; they'll take longer, but they will still
have access. And yes, there will still be a tiny proportion of users, who
despite our best efforts, will be unable to access the service without
additional help. But at least, by providing the ramp, I have afforded the
majority of wheel-chair bound users access.

Kind regards, Harry