3 ms·
Whatever happened to "progressive enhancement"? It's possible to build a very rich experience around standard HTML+CSS and then enhance it with Javascript. This
by Smudge 12y ago
Whatever happened to "progressive enhancement"? It's possible to build a very rich experience around standard HTML+CSS and then enhance it with Javascript. This is how much of Github works. I'm not saying you should always take that approach, but if you're a small company with limited resources you can still choose which route you want to go down, and if you choose "progressive enhancement" then you have a site you know will (mostly) work without JS, without having to do any extra work on top of you usual development process. Rich companies can, of course, take both routes, but if you're going to build a javascript-heavy site you should at least understand the trade-offs and alternatives before you dive in head-first.
- notatoad 12y agoWhat happened to progressive enhancement is that it's a fair bit of work, and putting in extra hours to support the three "power users" who have decided they want to run noscript isn't worth my time.
- sanderjd 12y agoI feel like I specifically spoke to this in my comment that you responded to, but I guess I wasn't clear. My whole point was that doing progressive enhancement really well is much more expensive and has very little practical pay off (because within the margin of error, everybody has javascript turned on), so if you know you want lots of interactivity, it is reasonable to require javascript from the start. That is an understanding of the trade-offs. The part I might be wrong about is "doing progressive enhancement really well is much more expensive" - that's just my opinion based on anecdotal experience.