4 ms·
I disagree. They speak from experience. Removing JS from the user experience simplifies the developer's toolset to a subset which is usually also accessible. T
by tomrod 5y ago
I disagree. They speak from experience. Removing JS from the user experience simplifies the developer's toolset to a subset which is usually also accessible.
There is still room for beloved JS, such as serving ads, tracking user behavior, mining crypto on unsuspecting users' computers, centering a div, and all the other arcane utilities for which one disables JS in the browser for.
- rajin444 5y agoAccessibility and JS are not mutually exclusive. It's just much easier to do accessibility without JS.
- tomrod 5y agoExactly. Removing JS simplifies a developers toolkit to a subset that is also often accessible.
- shadowgovt 5y agoCorrect. More specifically, the HTML standard itself has quite a bit of accessibility friendliness baked in, and the remainder has been patched over by screen readers and other tools successfully due to sheer age of the standard. When you make the site self-modifying with JavaScript, you as the developer are taking on the responsibility of continuing that chain of wise design decisions. And much like the thought that you probably shouldn't roll your own crypto unless you're a cryptography expert, maybe bending the user experience too far is something you shouldn't do unless you have some accessibility training.