Conversation
Notices
-
Today, my search engine trolled me: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=table+flip
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:26:09 UTC from web-
@omni Your search engine requires javascript.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:28:20 UTC from web-
@toksyuryel That version does. They also provide a link to the static version from the same warning.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:29:47 UTC from web -
@toksyuryel They also have a HTML and Lite version which don't require Javascript, but the search query doesn't seem to appear in the title. So, you'll have to type "table flip" in by yourself: https://duckduckgo.com/html/
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:30:02 UTC from web -
@toksyuryel His search engine is also vehemently against more or less all of the bad things you could do with javascript.
-
@ceruleanspark @omni @bitshift It's the fact that it's required that bothered me, not the fact that it's present at all. I'm perfectly alright with enabling it for them, I just don't like it when sites present me with a "this site requires javascript" page.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:32:51 UTC from web-
@toksyuryel I see what you're getting at, but "This site requires Javascript, but here's a link to our non-Javascript version." seems a pretty good compromise to me.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:35:38 UTC from web-
@bitshift I'd rather just not see a message at all and be taken to the non-js version.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:40:27 UTC from web-
@toksyuryel How would they redirect you? A <meta> directive would redirect everyone instead of just the non-JS users, and setting location.href would require javascript.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:42:39 UTC from web -
@toksyuryel On the other hand, the ideal would be starting with the pure-HTML/CSS version and progressively enhancing it to the current regular version if Javascript is on. Kinda disappointed they don't do that.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:46:34 UTC from web-
@bitshift I think non JS browsers are considered edge cases, with the exception of when you're optimising for crawlers.
-
@ceruleanspark Mm. But I've honestly never had trouble with designing for progressive enhancement (i.e., make sure the HTML is structured sensibly, then style it nicely with CSS, then add bells and whistles with JS), so I suspect it's more that most people don't think to do so.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:49:54 UTC from web-
@bitshift I'm not suggesting that Progressive Enhancement isn't the correct way to approach development, but I guess if you are already in production, pushing for a rewrite to improve the experience for a small number of end users is a tough row to hoe.
-
@ceruleanspark Mm, I can certainly understand that.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:54:13 UTC from web
-
-
-
@ceruleanspark (Web apps notwithstanding, since a lot of them inherently require JS for their actual work. In that case, you'd design all 3 at once, I guess.)
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:50:55 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
@toksyuryel After all, that version of the site does require Javascript, so it's not technically wrong.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:36:16 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
@omni More likely it's the result of someone having fun with http://duckduckhack.com/, rather than DDG themselves deciding to add that. Still, it's pretty neat. (And I could actually see myself finding a use for it, too.)
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:31:00 UTC from web-
@bitshift How could you find use for it? No, seriously, I wonder what use other than entertainment it has.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:33:04 UTC from web-
@omni Well, the flipping itself is only ever likely to be for entertainment, but knowing that DDG can do the flipping is useful in those cases where I want to flip something for said entertainment purposes.
Tuesday, 09-Oct-12 15:34:29 UTC from web
-
-
-
