I agree, however I have worked for product companies who simply say "To use X you MUST have javascript enabled." In fact my last company did this. And after seeing the codebase shortly after starting there in their services division I understood why. A choice had been made early in the development (as in 3 or 4 versions prior to the current one) and it dominoed. To change the product to gracefully handle people without javascript enabled would simply have been cost prohibitive.
On the other side of the coin I have done contracts at corporations that turn off javascript and do not allow it to be enabled at all on their internal (workstation) machines. It's a catch 22 almost. Js does allow some very cool things to be done, but it is still a "security hole." Basically you are making requests behind the users back in this case. And that is what security folks start to freak out about. (can you tell I'm on a security consulting gig right now? :) The bottom line is really how hard it would be to "gracefully" fall back to a full page refresh using "struts-ajax", which is basically what you suggest. Al -----Original Message----- From: Benedict, Paul C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:19 PM To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' Subject: RE: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie! To Frank's point, I am sometimes one of those users who turn off JavaScript ;-) But, it's a moot point, because, as I see it, no one's website should depend on JavaScript for it to be fully functional anymore than it should wholly rely on CSS. These are technologies that enable powerful usability, but websites should gracefully degrade when they are not available. So Ajax should add "nice to have's", but not "must have's". --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
