4 ms·
Bummer, the images display not at all with JavaScript turned off and there's no way to link to a specific image. Degrade gracefully y'all.
by xbryanx 15y ago
Bummer, the images display not at all with JavaScript turned off and there's no way to link to a specific image. Degrade gracefully y'all.
- jmilloy 15y agoPerhaps it's the responsibility of each website using slider.js to degrade gracefully on their own. That seems more appropriate to me. In which case, I don't mind if they don't bother to degrade while demoing their javascript product.
- gee_totes 15y agoYeah, I can't even scroll the page on Chrome
- wavephorm 15y agoAre you really demanding that the author of an open source javascript project to supply non-javascript code to make your website backwards compatible? You've gotta be kidding me. That's not his responsibilty at all. Try contributing to an open source project instead of complaining.
- xbryanx 15y agoYep, I absolutely expect that. Especially on the example page.
- wavephorm 15y agoSo now you have 2 problems: 1) Your website requires backwards compatibility 2) It's not his problem Better whine and complain on the internet until someone fixes your problems for you.
- gren 15y agoProblem solved: It's very easy to handle a Javascript fallback for Slider.js: Instead of having an empty container in which your slider will be templated, put the content for the non-javascript into it. That's it ;) Just because the Slider Javascript will empty the content of it ;) (Side thought: maybe I'm wrong, but in 2011, are we still need a JS backwards?)