7 ms·
One thing you almost certainly want to change is the site's behavior with Javascript disabled - right now, it just shows a white screen with the text "Loading F
by larkeith 8y ago
One thing you almost certainly want to change is the site's behavior with Javascript disabled - right now, it just shows a white screen with the text "Loading FWD:Everyone".
It's a bit of a pet peeve for me to see pages like this that are primarily static but are not accessible without JS, but I can understand that making a page built with a JS frontend work without it might be more work than it's worth, at least for an early stage project.
However, you really should put up some sort of notice to users - while being able to read a short blurb about what the site is nice, even just "<noscript>This site requires Javascript to view.</noscript>" is better than a blank page or permanent loading screen.
- Alex3917 8y agoGood suggestion on the noscript. There is actually a bunch of animation and interactivity on the site though. E.g. if you click on anyone in a thread, you see their bio and their other threads. And when you hover over a user’s popsicle stick on the newsfeed it pops up, which is stupid but oddly satisfying... We tried to give it the feel of popping bubble wrap. Anyway prerendering more stuff is on our roadmap, so once that’s set up we can reevaluate.
- angersock 8y agoIt's called CSS3 mate.
- amsheehan 8y agoYou're absolutely right! We'll get this up ASAP. Thanks for your interest in the site.
- joeframbach 8y agoThis also applies to the case where JS fails. What if the browser supports js, but the request failed, or there was a syntax error, or some other fatal that halts js? Your users will be left on a lark without anything to look at.