At Yahoo! we build our sites to work without JS and then add progressive enhancement. I don't have the stats in front of me, but we find a much larger number of users without JS.
Take a look at this page: http://finance.yahoo.com/news With JS enabled and disabled you'll see all of the customization functionality works. The personalization features were built by Dirk Ginader who also made this presentation on why and how you should build sites for everyone. http://www.slideshare.net/ginader/the-5-layers-of-web-accessibility Ted DRAKE -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris Dimmock Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 3:23 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessible websites (was: accessible free web hosting account) I'll just address one you raised Jens. Google does not currently parse external Javascript files. So unless Fairfax uses simple inline Javascript, and exposes spiderable URLS, that's probably good enough for most of us to use progressive enhancement methodology . Ask Lucas. When he gets back from SG Chris http://www.cogentis.com.au > >> Is there any other strong arguments for making pages available, >> without javascript enabled? > > I'd like to know too. On the Sydney Morning Herald in June less than > 0.5% of users had JS disabled. Maybe we should drop that support? > Anyone willing to share their numbers/reasons? ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [email protected] ******************************************************************* ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [email protected] *******************************************************************
