On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Karl Swedberg <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Dec 16, 2011, at 10:05 AM, Claus Reinke wrote:
>
> > There is a widespread pattern on the web that I don't understand.
> <snip>
> > The problem is that users who disable Javascript by default see
> > nothing at all on such sites, even though the content could be read just
> fine by removing the default styling. Try the example.
>
> I agree that this is a problem (or "anti-pattern").
> >
> > If the rationale above is correct, there would seem to be a simple
> workaround, which is to hide content via a css class, and to attach that
> class dynamically, before the content is parsed and rendered.
> > That way content is hidden by default only when script is enabled:
>
> This is the approach I've taken, as well, except I'd recommend adding the
> class the the html element and put the script in the <head>. I  actually
> thought this approach was pretty widespread, as well. But maybe not.
> Anyway, I wrote about it three years ago:
> http://www.learningjquery.com/2008/10/1-way-to-avoid-the-flash-of-unstyled-content


Great reference. Another is http://paulirish.com/2009/avoiding-the-fouc-v3/and
http://paulirish.com/2009/avoiding-the-fouc-v3/#comment-34951 both linked
to from html5boilerplate.com docs. What this second link adds specifically
to the conversation is deciding to remove a no-js class vs adding a js
class can affect the specificity. Worth considering.

- Richard

-- 
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]

Reply via email to