dcsimg
www.webdeveloper.com
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: javascrpt - is it accessible by most?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6

    javascrpt - is it accessible by most?

    Hi

    I am currently developing a page where by the users can select their products to purchase. The products that they are offered on this page all depends on their selections.

    Javascript can achieve what I want, but as this is the point of sale page I was umming and arring to develop in this as I am questioning the percentage of users who may have javascript disabled.

    I was wondering your views on this?
    Share on Google+

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland
    Posts
    12,279
    It's a little under one in ten, which is a very huge number.

    But the number doesn't matter at all. There are some people who cannot use a browser supporting JavaScript because they have some sort of disability. And often these are the very people who could most benefit from the internet. Hence Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 priority 1 guideline, "Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned off or not supported." ( http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/...l#tech-scripts )

    Web pages that rely upon JavaScript are just plain cruel. So cruel that in the United States and under the Americans with Disabilities Act they are against the law for commercial sites.
    “The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”
    —Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web
    Share on Google+

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Charles
    Web pages that rely upon JavaScript are just plain cruel. So cruel that in the United States and under the Americans with Disabilities Act they are against the law for commercial sites.
    Well, that's not quite correct. Many commercial sites use JavaScript. The correct method to use is to make sure that, if it is not available to the customer, that there is an alternative method. Most of the strictest legal requirements pertain to sites that deal with the U.S. government.

    The use of JavaScript is very widespread on the Internet and is not likely to decrease anytime soon. It is here to stay and, in the correct usage, is a viable assest to a Website. There are some people that for some reason don't like it but that's their choice. However, it's about as "evil" as PHP, Perl, Java, SQL, or any other viable technique.
    Share on Google+

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeU
    Many commercial sites use JavaScript.
    And that snow ball rolloing down the hill gathering size and speed is the law suits starting to pile up.

    You'll note above that I wrote about web sites that rely upon JavaScript. A site that provides "an alternative method" can't be said to be relying upon JavaScript and so my statement above is exactly correct.

    JavaScript's here to stay, you say, but so to is murder, rape and torture. And while it's not nearly in the same league you get the idea. And there is something quite a diffference between client side scripts like Java and JavaScript and server side scripts like PHP, Perl and such. The server side scripts, if they work for one person they work for all and this is very much not the case for client side scripts. And as such they can hardly be called "viable".
    “The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.”
    —Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web
    Share on Google+

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    3,453
    Charles,

    Most of us here are all aware of your feelings on JavaScript. There is no need to go off on a tirade each time someone asks the question on these forums. (You also insult those who have suffered murder, rape and torture when you compare them to something as small as JS.) Say whay you will, JavaScript is an accepted method on the Web.

    hame23 asked for views, which implies that he also is looking for alternative suggestions. Just say you don't think JS would be good in his case and offer alternatives. If you're not going to offer other suggestions, then it's not conducive to the forum to answer the questions. Start a blog if you want to expound on the "evils" of JS.
    Share on Google+

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Manhattan NY
    Posts
    6,028
    Charles, rest it, permanently, or find somewhere else to post. This message board is not a forum for your personal views on javascript, which are disproportionately hateful, as is demonstrated by the absurdity of the analogy you chose. I hope that's clear.
    Share on Google+

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    6,276
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeU
    hame23 asked for views, which implies that he also is looking for alternative suggestions. Just say you don't think JS would be good in his case and offer alternatives.
    From the way hame23 phrased his post, it seems he is already aware of alternatives such as PHP, but was asking about whether it would be acceptable to use JavaScript for this particular feature, based upon the %age of users who have JavaScript enabled/disabled. So I don't see anything wrong with Charles' reply.

    In fact, it isn't very helpful at all to simply say, "JavaScript isn't a good idea in this case." Because that leaves the OP wondering why it's not, and when it would be a good idea to use JavaScript. Some explanation is therefore necessary, and that is what was given.
    Quote Originally Posted by Charles
    "Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned off or not supported." ( http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/...l#tech-scripts )
    Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
    Share on Google+

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by David Harrison
    In fact, it isn't very helpful at all to simply say, "JavaScript isn't a good idea in this case."
    Read the post! I said "and offer alternatives". David, I would think that you felt that discussion was more important than the way that Charles seems to tear people and JavaScript apart. His attitude after the original post shows his real intention.

    Your defense of Charles causes me concern. We're not going to debate Charles' rudeness in this thread.

    Unfortunately, as is usually the case with Charles' post, we have gotten completely off track. hame23 please open a new thread with your question. This one is closed.
    Share on Google+

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center



Recent Articles