Howa, Thank for the information. I like this graded support chart in this article. Good example of someone applying software engineering principles to Web development.
I guess the "good" thing is that the industry is maturing. Inevitably there will be efforts to consolidate, to provide meaning and to give guidance because truth be told, it is a "Freaking Mess" out there. Theses are all reasons why for many years people went with one vendor. The "web" broke that, but if you think about, we are going back to that one vendor or narrowing down the resouces that you use. It happens to all, you, me, etc, to everything we do, to every product, to every web site, to every team or lone wolf programmer out there. I did read a blog yesterday, and I probably misunderstood him but I was taken aside by what he said because he had a damn good argument about something that I can relate to and have come across many times in many of my product development over the years. Many products come to a point where you have to make a decision where you totally revamp, start fresh, where "progressive enhancement" may not be a good idea. I would venturre that the older the product is, the more true this is. While one might think that a migration or phased design approach is a good idea to reach progressive enchancement, it can actually make things worst in cost of development, even adds complexity and the add to the development of "Spaghetti Code." Some have the luxury to do new things without contraints, some can not afford that luxury and others can only afford to go slow at it, and by afford I don't mean just cost, but you have customers that you can't break the software and functionality on them. For us, we are in a blend of this. We have a very dated system, yet still have functionality and ideas that many are going to. For the web side, this web 2.0 hangout for me is that effort to see how much revamping we have to do. Can we migrate smoothly? Can we add more Web 1.5 or 2.0 while keeping backward compatibility? How much of the server-side template processing will change, how much will be move to the client? The jQuery discovery has helped tremendously in this effort. Anyway, I appreciate all the input and yes, even an old dog can learn new tricks or rather "commands." <g> Thanks -- HLS On Aug 16, 10:38 pm, howa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/ > > Progressive Enhancement vs. Graceful Degradation > The concepts of graceful degradation and progressive enhancement are > often applied to describe browser support strategies. Indeed, they are > closely related approaches to the engineering of "fault tolerance". > > These two concepts influence decision-making about browser support. > Because they reflect different priorities, they frame the support > discussion differently. Graceful degradation prioritizes presentation, > and permits less widely-used browsers to receive less (and give less > to the user). Progressive enhancement puts content at the center, and > allows most browsers to receive more (and show more to the user). > While close in meaning, progressive enhancement is a healthier and > more forward-looking approach. Progressive enhancement is a core > concept of Graded Browser Support. > > So to my understanding, > > Unobtrusive Javascript ~ Graceful Degradation > > not really a good thing and not the same as Progressive Enhancement > > On 8月16日, 下午10時13分, Pops <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I"ve seen this term referred to a few times, especially here: > > >http://simonwillison.net/2007/Aug/15/jquery/ > > > What does Unobtrusive Javascript mean? > > > I am getting the idea that jQuery offers a way to bypass a user > > turning off JavaScript? > > > How does jQuery do this? > > > Thanks
