6 ms·
You haven't addressed the core argument: The vast majority of people (more than 99%) don't disable javascript, so from the perspective of the key decision make
by dwaltrip 10y ago
You haven't addressed the core argument:
The vast majority of people (more than 99%) don't disable javascript, so from the perspective of the key decision makers (project leads, managers, CTOs, etc), it's a complete non-issue. They consider the usage/non-usage of javascript to be largely irrelevant.
- quadrangle 10y agoSorry but appeal to popularity can justify a pragmatic decision not to DO anything about a stupid situation, but it doesn't make it non-stupid. Just accept saying "yeah, it's idiotic that Javascript is needed in X framework just to show text, but it's not a priority for most people to fix it" instead of trying to say that it isn't a shitty bug. It's a shitty bug that comes from a stupid bad design, but you can get away with it these days because it affects only a minority of people in practice. That's the simple truth here.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]