i absolutely hate how the modern web just fails to load if one has javascript turned off. i, as a user, should be able to switch off javascript and have the site work exactly as it does with javascript turned on. it’s not a hard concept, people.

but you ask candidates to explain “graceful degradation” and they’ll sit and look at you with a blank stare.

  • Korne127@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    I, as a user, should be able to switch off javascript and have the site work exactly as it does with javascript turned on.

    I mean… many websites rely on JavaScript, so it’s kind of obvious that they don’t work without it. If it would work without JS in the first place, the website wouldn’t need to embed any JS code.

    • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      There’s a difference between “wouldn’t work” and “wouldn’t work as nicely”. That’s what this post is about :D Most websites would still work in the same basic way without js.

      • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        OP really muddled the waters by writing:

        exactly as it does with javascript turned on

        That’s obviously impossible and wouldn’t be degraded.

          • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            14 hours ago

            It’s either exactly the same, or it’s gracefully degraded. You’re asking for two opposite things at once.

            For what it’s worth I support the notion that fundamental functionality should be supported without Javascript, with good old form submissions.

            But I also recognise that you can’t get the exact same behaviour without javascript initiated background GETs and POSTs. Easy example: A scrollable map that streams in chunks as you move it.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      so it’s kind of obvious that they don’t work without it.

      Uhm, the web is to share content, not to play JS. That’s what graceful degradation is for: the primary usecase should still work, even if the secondary or tertiary doesn’t.

      • Korne127@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Uhm, the web is to share content, not to play JS

        The web doesn’t have a single unified purpose. Even if I hate it as a programming language, JavaScript if the basis almost all client-side browser operations build upon.

        Sure, a simple website which just contains information works without it, but if you design a website in which the client does anything interactively and not everything should be processed server-side, it’s not really possible. No matter if you’re talking about a web game, something like Google Earth or an in-browser editor.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      website wouldn’t need to embed any JS code.

      other than the 20 trackers and ad scripts.

    • katy ✨@piefed.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      many websites rely on JavaScript,

      which is the problem that most people don’t understand the concept of graceful degradation