On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:51:05 +0100, Aryeh Gregor
<[email protected]> wrote:
<noscript> is a very poor solution, and <nostyle> would be too. You
should use graceful degradation/progressive enhancement instead (in
both cases).
Graceful degradation is not necessarily possible with JavaScript. For
instance, consider a real-time game written in JavaScript.
True, but <noscript> doesn't allow implementation of games either.
What matters is cases where fallback is possible, and where <nostyle>
would improve it.
Sometimes <noscript> can be used for graceful fallback, too. For
instance, if a script normally generates an element dynamically when
needed, the element might be placed statically inside <noscript> so
that it always appears if script is disabled. (For instance, a
"Nationality" form in a field that only appears if a radio control is
changed from the default of "U.S. Citizen".) Without <noscript>, the
only way I know of to allow graceful fallback is to do something like
hide the element onload, which will make it briefly visible.
It doesn't have to be briefly visible. Don't use onload, but an inline
script:
<div id="hideme">
<script>document.getElementById('hideme').hidden = true</script>
(in)visible content…
</div>
If your page uses DHTML a lot, and has fallback in many places, there's
nice trick for it:
<head>
<script>document.documentElement.className += " script-supported"</script>
<style>.script-supported .dhtml-fallback {display:none}</style>
--
regards, Kornel Lesinski
