Re: The Problem With <NOSCRIPT>

Russ Thomas wrote:
> 
> > Has anyone else noticed the fundamental flaw in the <NOSCRIPT> tag
> > as currently implemented?  Consider the following page (sans
> > DOCTYPE):

[snip]

> > Here's what I propose.  Before the LANGUAGE attribute can be
> > depreciated, it needs a replacement that will adequately substitute
> > for the information that it provides.  To that end, I propose
> > allowing the <NOSCRIPT> tag to take the TYPE attribute, as well as
> > developing a new VER (version) attribute that would apply to both
> > <SCRIPT> and <NOSCRIPT>.
>
> Yes, that's workable I believe.  Yet in a multi-scripting environment
> it may prove messy - maybe?  If NOSCRIPT was by definition associated
> with SCRIPT (aliken this to FRAMESET/NOFRAMES) then a disassociated
> pair matching need not take place...
> 
> <title>Document Title</title>
> <script [who_cares]>Boogedy!<br>
> <noscript>
> uh... I'm confused...
> </noscript>
> </script>
> End of text.
> 
> In this model, there is no need to match attr pairs
> 
> Anyone see any holes here?

Yep, I see a big one - the contents of <script> should be commented out
for non-scripting browsers, which means that those browsers which most
need the <noscript> content will never see it.

Also, consider the case in which someone scripts content in multiple
languages on the same page, and may want to use the same <noscript>
contents for all of 'em.  (In that circumstance, it would be helpful if
the VER and TYPE attributes in <NOSCRIPT> could be comma-delineated
lists, ie. <noscript type="text/jss,text/tcl" ver="1.2,1.0"> - in which
the contents are displayed if neither JavaScript 1.2 nor TCL 1.0 are
recognized.
 
-- 

 Rev. Robert L. Hood  | http://rev-bob.home.ml.org/
   Rage InfoCentral   | http://rageccg.home.ml.org/
   CCG InfoCentral    | http://rev-bob.home.ml.org/info_cen.html
 Chattanooga, TN LARP | http://paradigms.home.ml.org/
  Get Off The Cross!  | http://gotc.base.org/

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 1997 23:18:11 UTC