- From: Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl@getdesigned.at>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:42:53 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
Johannes Koch wrote: > I think, whether you need an alternative (noscript) for the scripting > depends on what is done in the script. If essential functionality is > added via scripting, a noscript alternative _is_ needed. If the functionality is so essential, then all that could possibly be in the <noscript> element is a notice that the page doesn't work without JavaScript - something you can simply put in the page anyway and then remove with JavaScript. If scripting doesn't work, it won't get removed. Given that, without document.write, all JS stuff is done after page load, you can simply emulate <noscript> functionality by having, for example, an element class 'noscript' and simply removing, with JS, all elements carrying this class prior to doing the real JS stuff. Sebastian Redl
Received on Monday, 24 July 2006 18:43:46 UTC