It doesn't sound horrible at all. We use javascript sparingly because of the problems it can cause if it's turned off. Just one of the problems with CFFORM too.
Having a page work with javascript disabled is a W3C Priority 1 guideline. http://w3c.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-new-technologies "6.3 Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not possible, provide equivalent information on an alternative accessible page." Oh, that reminds me of something Jason was showing me today that we need to look at to make sure it's accessible. Wheeee. -Kevin On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 14:55:45 -0500, Erika L. Walker-Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In fact, as horrible as it sounds, none of our sites have JavaScript > validation right now. > We rely on server side. Mostly because 95% of our clients were corporate > and pharmaceutical. So we stuck with that mantra. > We do utilize DHTML menus on a lot of our stuff - but for the pharma and > corporate, we have a non-JS backup. > We are scheduled to add JS validation sometime this year to everything. > But it is not a priority. > > > Cheers, > Erika ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Now there’s a better way to fax. eFax makes it possible to use your existing email account to send and receive faxes. Try eFax free. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=63 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:148934 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
