From: "Jon Freeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I am in the UK and have run browsers with JS turned off. The only reason I > have it on now is I find there are too many sites I visit that require the > stuff - almost a case of being bullied into using it. Where I still keep it > turned off is with the dreaded Outlook Express wich I have assigned to the > "Restricted Sites" zone on IE. I also have that set for text only. Once in a > while I get a popup telling me that a message can't be read because of my > settings, eg. it's been sent as html only but quite frankly I can't be > bothered making changes to read. Insane Jon says that it's a sad world that > needs all sorts of fancy looking stuff to communicate when plain text does > the job perfectly well...
Just a little rider to the above... There are cases where I believe the use of JS or other stuff is justified, eg. if I was selling a Porche it would be nice to display it using VMRL (I think that was what it was called) where a 3d image could be rotated but for what I try, folk music, why not keep things simple and allow as many as you can to view your site? Why complicate what doesn't need to be complicated and what do things like flashy mouse cursors, etc. tell you about a site? In most cases, they tell me that more thought has been given to gimicks which are often annoying than to content... Most scarey of all to me was I was on an HNC (buisness IT) where they encouraged such practices. We were asked to design a "web site" for an assignment. Mine was folk related. I got slammed for not using tools like Dream Weaver, no frames, no effects, etc. It was not a case of I could not have done it - I could have produced a "web site" unusable to anyone without IE, that needed plugins downloaded, etc and got a distinction for the crap I'd produced... Jon To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
