4 ms·
JS is very useful in many cases. Don't just think about documents or single blog posts in those cases static content should be sufficient. But the web evolved
by kowdermeister 8y ago
JS is very useful in many cases. Don't just think about documents or single blog posts in those cases static content should be sufficient.
But the web evolved to be way more than being a dumb content delivery pipe, it's an application development platform bypassing the underlying OS.
So ask yourself, if you need well behaved image galleries, do you need JS? Yes.
Do you want to avoid page reloading to navigate? You need JS.
Do you want login/form validation? You need JS.
Need an inline calculator?
Update content from the server?
Monitor the progress of a long lasting server job?
Add any logic to a shopping cart?
And these are very simple use cases, web apps are needless to say changed the way we ship apps and they all rely on JS.
I'm very much in support of offloading as many tasks to CSS as possible, but JS is hard to avoid if you want to do anything beyond static content delivery.
- nikanj 8y agoBut it’s also used in completely idiotic places. Want to display a 100% static blog post? With just thirteen megabytes of JS, you can break scrolling, zooming, screen readers, and many others. Reminds me of emails and newsletters. Yes, they have many legitimate uses, but that doesn’t change the fact that a large part of them are just plain crap. I feel like both sides of the debate are refusing to admit the other side might also have some valid points. Which admittably seems to be the theme in all of the internet.
- kowdermeister 8y agoAuthors are free to alienate their audience the way they please :)