Timeline for Is it a common practice to minimize JavaScript usage when building a website?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2017 at 7:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Nov 10, 2012 at 23:20 | comment | added | Spidey | It's only profesional to support all use cases. If you missed it, that's alright, everyone errs once in a while, but neglecting them is a different problem. I'm all in for developing websites 100% WITHOUT JS, and after making it work, add the JS to streamline tasks and make the UX better. | |
| S Nov 9, 2012 at 22:05 | history | suggested | samthebrand | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
inserted hyperlink to Programmers question
|
| Nov 9, 2012 at 21:38 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 9, 2012 at 22:05 | |||||
| Sep 1, 2012 at 17:26 | comment | added | Tom Marthenal | @JörgWMittag if you're going to disable a web technology, you should not expect to get the full benefits of the website. Scenarios differ, but if I'm building a web app I'm probably not wasting my time building in full compatibility for a minority of my users who refuse to move to the 21st century. Similar to how I don't support IE 6 in most of my projects. | |
| Aug 29, 2012 at 14:45 | history | edited | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 381 characters in body
|
| Aug 29, 2012 at 11:06 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | I agree with most of what is said here, but I strongly object to the idea that a site should be "at least minimally usable without JavaScript". That's wrong: it should be maximally usable without JavaScript. | |
| Aug 29, 2012 at 10:37 | history | edited | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
typo fixed
|
| Aug 29, 2012 at 9:19 | history | edited | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 39 characters in body
|
| Aug 29, 2012 at 7:41 | comment | added | Daniel B | +1 although I would agree that you should keep minimal usability without JS where possible. Also, some sites benefit more from JS than others. E.g. I don't think heavy JS would add much to most of Wikipedia (except maybe the moderation side). On the other hand, an interactive chessboard would be difficult to make slick, without it. | |
| Aug 29, 2012 at 7:30 | comment | added | GordonM | If a site isn't usable without javascript then it can't be effectively crawled by Google, and it may or may not be usable in a RESTful context. Even Facebook is at least minimally usable without javascript | |
| Aug 29, 2012 at 6:48 | comment | added | tdammers | Here's a few: SEO, web aggregators, screen readers, NoScript, curl, mobile browsers. I disable scripts by default, and most of the internet still works just fine. | |
| Aug 29, 2012 at 6:40 | comment | added | superM | +1 Though "you don't have any use for it" doesn't stop everyone ))) | |
| Aug 29, 2012 at 6:33 | history | answered | Doc Brown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |