6 ms·

The HTML5 video element has an `autoplay` attribute that does not require Javascript to my knowledge. Also, a depressingly large and increasing number of websit

by Nadya 8y ago

The HTML5 video element has an `autoplay` attribute that does not require Javascript to my knowledge. Also, a depressingly large and increasing number of websites are actually not readable if you disable Javascript. [0] There are also some sites where users usually want the video to autoplay, where the primary purpose of the site is watching videos (eg. Youtube, Niconico Douga, Vimeo) so disabling it as a default is more annoying than beneficial because it would also break it for those sites. [0] Source: I browse with JS disabled.

3xblah 8y ago
In my experience disbaling Javascript and Flash will stop autoplay. If you have examples, please share as I would like to test. Can you point me toward me some of the depressingly large examples of websites that require Javascript in order to read text? I would like to test. On the contrary, I have found a very large number of websites that do not require Javascript to read text. Of course our browsing habits are probably different. What I sometimes see is small amounts of text that are "hidden" by Javascript, perhaps to conserve screen space. For example, a click event "unhides" the text. One can view easily view the "hidden", plain text in the source of the page. I have not seen entire articles hidden this way. As for YouTube, it can be whitelisted in browser settings if the user wants autoplay. Does YouTube rely on Javascript or HTML5 for autoplay? Can one test reliably (not simply by user-agent string) whether a user's browser supports HTML5 autoplay without using Javascript to perform the test? It seems like using Javascript for autoplay would be the safer bet for a website that wants to be sure videos will autoplay. One thing I notice is that although disabling Javascript might stop autoplay, HTML5 can still force autoload, downloading the entire video even if the user has no intention of ever playing it. That could be a problem for a user wanting to minimise her data usage.
- Nadya 8y ago
  If a website makes heavy use of a JS framework like Vue/React/Angular and does client-side rendering as opposed to server-side rendering, as an increasing number of sites do, then you run into issues. This isn't all that uncommon when checking out websites here on HN, both as submissions and within comments. I don't keep a running list of sites I'm not able to visit as that's a rather pointless list to maintain. I do encounter them frequently while browsing HN. So I did a search on HN for "blank when javascript is disabled" and you'll get a number of results. Here's the first few I came across: - http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14145881 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14145881 - https://zencastr.com/ https://zencastr.com/ - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12065622 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12065622 - https://belowthesurface.amsterdam/en/vondsten https://belowthesurface.amsterdam/en/vondsten - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17439832 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17439832 - https://blog.stgolabs.net/2018/03/linux-v415-performance-goodies.html https://blog.stgolabs.net/2018/03/linux-v415-performance-goo... - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16659360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16659360 - https://pricehipster.com/ https://pricehipster.com/ - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17467204 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17467204 You also can't sign into a Google account anymore [0]. Though to be fair if you're someone browsing with Javascript disabled you're probably not using Google and don't have a Google account to sign into. I frequently browse only four websites. Three if you don't want to count my own. It's the sites I discover/find from these three websites where I encounter issues. HN is a frequent source of "this site has no content when JS disabled" and it's becoming increasingly more common since 2012-2013. Given how few people browse with Javascript disabled, many of these sites (rightfully IMO, even if annoyingly) file it into the "such a small amount of users it doesn't matter" cabinet. [0] https://security.googleblog.com/2018/10/announcing-some-security-treats-to.html https://security.googleblog.com/2018/10/announcing-some-secu...
  - jazoom 8y ago
    I'm the creator of Price Hipster, which you linked to. It's not just that pretty much no one disables JavaScript. It's also that the website is very interactive and responsive and would have to be designed very differently to avoid JavaScript. Much more data would be consumed if every action resulted in a call to the server and a fully rendered page returned each time, and the website would be a lot less snappy and less nice to use.
    - 3xblah 8y ago
      I apologise that he used your site as an example. Nice work, BTW. The question we were discussing is whether a user who "just wants to read an article" needs to keep Javascript enabled for every website she visits, or whether she could keep it off by default and whitelist a smaller number of sites where she wishes to turn on Javascript for whatever reason (such as Price Hipster). I would not question whether anyone should enable Javascript when using the web to do shopping online. However I think "just reading an article" online is a different category of use entirely. The costs of enabling Javascript in that case may outweigh the benefits.
      - jazoom 8y ago
        > I apologise that he used your site as an example. Nice work, BTW. No probs. I know people here get passionate about the health of the WWW. And thanks :-)
    - Nadya 8y ago
      That sounds like a great line to put in your <noscript> tag! For the three or four people who hit your site with JS disabled each decade. ;) "Price Hipster is a modern website and requires JavaScript to be enabled." This tells me nothing about what the site does, why the site needs Javascript enabled, or gives me any incentive to whitelist Javascript for the site since I don't know why or what it will be doing with Javascript. Now, I happen to know what your site does because of your (previous) post here on HN. So I understand that what you are doing more or less requires Javascript and that's fine. On the plus side, at least you have a message instead of literally-a-blank-page! :) Didn't mean to pick on you, as I mentioned in the post it was basically the first five hits on HN for "this website is blank with Javascript disabled" since I don't keep a personal list.

by Nadya 8y ago

3xblah 8y ago

In my experience disbaling Javascript and Flash will stop autoplay. If you have examples, please share as I would like to test. Can you point me toward me some of the depressingly large examples of websites that require Javascript in order to read text? I would like to test. On the contrary, I have found a very large number of websites that do not require Javascript to read text. Of course our browsing habits are probably different. What I sometimes see is small amounts of text that are "hidden" by Javascript, perhaps to conserve screen space. For example, a click event "unhides" the text. One can view easily view the "hidden", plain text in the source of the page. I have not seen entire articles hidden this way. As for YouTube, it can be whitelisted in browser settings if the user wants autoplay. Does YouTube rely on Javascript or HTML5 for autoplay? Can one test reliably (not simply by user-agent string) whether a user's browser supports HTML5 autoplay without using Javascript to perform the test? It seems like using Javascript for autoplay would be the safer bet for a website that wants to be sure videos will autoplay. One thing I notice is that although disabling Javascript might stop autoplay, HTML5 can still force autoload, downloading the entire video even if the user has no intention of ever playing it. That could be a problem for a user wanting to minimise her data usage.

Nadya 8y ago
If a website makes heavy use of a JS framework like Vue/React/Angular and does client-side rendering as opposed to server-side rendering, as an increasing number of sites do, then you run into issues. This isn't all that uncommon when checking out websites here on HN, both as submissions and within comments. I don't keep a running list of sites I'm not able to visit as that's a rather pointless list to maintain. I do encounter them frequently while browsing HN. So I did a search on HN for "blank when javascript is disabled" and you'll get a number of results. Here's the first few I came across: - http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14145881 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14145881 - https://zencastr.com/ https://zencastr.com/ - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12065622 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12065622 - https://belowthesurface.amsterdam/en/vondsten https://belowthesurface.amsterdam/en/vondsten - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17439832 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17439832 - https://blog.stgolabs.net/2018/03/linux-v415-performance-goodies.html https://blog.stgolabs.net/2018/03/linux-v415-performance-goo... - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16659360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16659360 - https://pricehipster.com/ https://pricehipster.com/ - From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17467204 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17467204 You also can't sign into a Google account anymore [0]. Though to be fair if you're someone browsing with Javascript disabled you're probably not using Google and don't have a Google account to sign into. I frequently browse only four websites. Three if you don't want to count my own. It's the sites I discover/find from these three websites where I encounter issues. HN is a frequent source of "this site has no content when JS disabled" and it's becoming increasingly more common since 2012-2013. Given how few people browse with Javascript disabled, many of these sites (rightfully IMO, even if annoyingly) file it into the "such a small amount of users it doesn't matter" cabinet. [0] https://security.googleblog.com/2018/10/announcing-some-security-treats-to.html https://security.googleblog.com/2018/10/announcing-some-secu...
- jazoom 8y ago
  I'm the creator of Price Hipster, which you linked to. It's not just that pretty much no one disables JavaScript. It's also that the website is very interactive and responsive and would have to be designed very differently to avoid JavaScript. Much more data would be consumed if every action resulted in a call to the server and a fully rendered page returned each time, and the website would be a lot less snappy and less nice to use.
  - 3xblah 8y ago
    I apologise that he used your site as an example. Nice work, BTW. The question we were discussing is whether a user who "just wants to read an article" needs to keep Javascript enabled for every website she visits, or whether she could keep it off by default and whitelist a smaller number of sites where she wishes to turn on Javascript for whatever reason (such as Price Hipster). I would not question whether anyone should enable Javascript when using the web to do shopping online. However I think "just reading an article" online is a different category of use entirely. The costs of enabling Javascript in that case may outweigh the benefits.
    - jazoom 8y ago
      > I apologise that he used your site as an example. Nice work, BTW. No probs. I know people here get passionate about the health of the WWW. And thanks :-)
  - Nadya 8y ago
    That sounds like a great line to put in your <noscript> tag! For the three or four people who hit your site with JS disabled each decade. ;) "Price Hipster is a modern website and requires JavaScript to be enabled." This tells me nothing about what the site does, why the site needs Javascript enabled, or gives me any incentive to whitelist Javascript for the site since I don't know why or what it will be doing with Javascript. Now, I happen to know what your site does because of your (previous) post here on HN. So I understand that what you are doing more or less requires Javascript and that's fine. On the plus side, at least you have a message instead of literally-a-blank-page! :) Didn't mean to pick on you, as I mentioned in the post it was basically the first five hits on HN for "this website is blank with Javascript disabled" since I don't keep a personal list.