2 ms·
No, not sarcastically. It's the first time I saw the noscript message actually try and explain why exactly the Javascript is needed.
by huhtenberg 15y ago
No, not sarcastically. It's the first time I saw the noscript message actually try and explain why exactly the Javascript is needed.
- ComputerGuru 15y agoI understand, but (to me) graceful degradation isn't using a noscript tag to explain why you need JS, but rather implementing your site JS-free from the ground-up, then developing JS-based improvements that are loaded into the site for maximum grace and compatibility. It may be different for me since I've been deploying JS/AJAX on a number of eCommerce sites where you really don't want to lose even a single customer, I suppose. The basic site is designed without any JS, then if we're able to load JQuery and the browser meets our requirements (for instance, we just disable JS on any IE6 or below browsers), it'll load up nice features such as JS presentational effects, AJAX form submission, etc. EDIT: There's isn't a "budget" for this, it's really minimal extra work.
- huhtenberg 15y agoWell, there you go. You obviously have a budget for this sort of work. I also suspect that those with JS intentionally disabled don't really add much to the conversion rates even if they are treated nicely. Just look at the replies in this thread - a sense of entitlement to be spoon fed in the format they fancy is frankly disturbing. I wonder if showing them just a blank page would work better.