I would say that proper coding and proper QA will ensure that
Javascript works on Netscape and IE. In the event the user has disabled JS,
build in support for that too. It's not that hard to do. And by saying
that you'd use Flash instead of or that Flash is better than JS is
non-sense. If a browser can run Flash, it can run JS. By saying that,
you're saying that a user has a browser capable of supporting JS, but has it
disabled, and has installed a 3rd party piece of software for other
applications. Wild guess, but I'd say the percentage of users in that
situation is lower than the percentage of Lynx users visiting your site.
While I agree that validation and such is best done server side,
some things are a little better to do client side with JS (like totaling
orders, or simple calculations like qty * cost), however, your processes
should not count on this data to be accurate. It should still be calculated
server side.
It all comes down to QA. Come up with a test plan and follow it.
If you find something you missed later on, add it to the test plan. The CF
logs and Server logs contain a wealth of information for this purpose.
(Of course, this is just my opinion)
Heath Lord
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 8:24 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Best Practices
To be honest, try and avoid JavaScript unless you really have to use it.
If it can be done in CF do it in CF. One extra hit on the server won't
make much difference, where as a broken site because of a browser issue
will lose you customers.
I personally stipulate that JavaScript should not be used unless there is
no otherway of doing it. Even Flash is better than Javascript. At least
you know it works.
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Arnold - ASP [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 13 February 2001 10:44
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Best Practices
> Can anyone provide advice on an acceptable % or number of errors
> due to users setting up IE and NS browsers differently.
>
> I am finding, even thought I test on 6 different versions of IE
> and NS and 2 different OSs, I am still getting site errors on
> applications that tested OK.
If you're talking about CF errors ZERO!
If you're talking about JavaScript errors, then early version will have
problems, but try to build in redundancy so that it won't break if they
don't have the functionality...
Philip Arnold
Director
Certified ColdFusion Developer
ASP Multimedia Limited
T: +44 (0)20 8680 1133
"Websites for the real world"
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
**********************************************************************
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
