how universally enabled is Javascript?

[John Pote]

Hi everyone,

I've just started adding JavaScript to some of my web pages. It then
occurred to me that of course not everyone may have JavaScript in their
browser and more probably may have JavaScript disabled for security reasons
(particularly on machines within a company network).

So my questions are,
1: is there any estimate available of the percentage of users not having
JavaScript available to them,
2: how much effort is worth putting into <noscript>..... .</noscript>
alternatives,
3: could someone recommend a guide (online or book) to writing JavaScript so
it gracefully degrades when not available.

Many thanks to you all,

John

[Richard Cornford]

John Pote wrote:

Hi everyone,

I've just started adding JavaScript to some of my web pages.
It then occurred to me that of course not everyone may have
JavaScript in their browser and more probably may have
JavaScript disabled for security reasons (particularly on
machines within a company network).

So my questions are,
1: is there any estimate available of the percentage of users
not having JavaScript available to them,

There are lots. Some even resemble each other.

2: how much effort is worth putting into <noscript>
......</noscriptalterna tives,

None, NOSCRPT elements are of close to no use in dealing with the
consequences of javascript being disabled as javascript being disabled
is not the only condition in which scripts may not be able to act, and
so not the only condition for which designed fall-back is required (and
whatever suites the condition where scripting is available but cannot do
what it wants to do also suites the conditions where scripts cannot
execute at all).

3: could someone recommend a guide (online or book) to writing
JavaScript so it gracefully degrades when not available.

Possibly, but there will not be many. Searching the archives of
comp.lang.javas cript would probably turn up the most direct
consideration of the subject.

Richard.

[ASM]

John Pote a écrit :

1: is there any estimate available of the percentage of users not having
JavaScript available to them,

It's said about 10%

2: how much effort is worth putting into <noscript>..... .</noscript>
alternatives,

I think JS would have to be only in overlay, so noscript has no utility:
a "normal" page must work without JS, this last one bringing some
features not indispensable (decoration, help in forms ...)

3: could someone recommend a guide (online or book) to writing JavaScript so
it gracefully degrades when not available.

<a href="page.htm"
onclick="window .open(this.href );return false;">page</a>

If JS enabled the file 'page.htm' will be open in a new window,
if disabled the page is opened in same window.

An other way (not allowed in 'strict' where target is forbidden)
This time you'll get a new window (JS or not) :

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('','here' ,'width=400');" >page</a>

--
Stephane Moriaux and his less old Mac already out of date

[Peter Michaux]

Hi John,

John Pote wrote:

>
3: could someone recommend a guide (online or book) to writing JavaScript so
it gracefully degrades when not available.

A big part of the puzzle is feature detection
http://www.jibbering.com/faq/faq_not...er_detect.html

It seems like many people on comp.lang.javas cript are very concerned
with graceful degredation and I have been learning as much as I can so
I can make more informed decisions. There are many other developers out
there that don't care a bit. If it works on IE6+, FF1.5+, Opera8+,
Safari2+ then many are happy and have happy clients and all is well
with their worlds. I spent a lot of time thinking about degradation and
a while ago spewed some text about it
http://peter.michaux.ca/article/81 that is not definitive by any
stretch but may provoke thought.

The biggest problem seems to come when a branch of JavaScript starts
executing and once started must run to completion successfully. Suppose
that you rearrange the visual appearance of a page and hide certain
parts. If the browser won't let the person then make those hidden parts
reappear all is lost. So before rearranging the page you must make sure
the whole thing will work. The rearranging needs gateway tests before
starting to ensure the browser can handle everything required.

Here is an example on Richard's page that I found useful in
understanding some of the issues.

http://www.litotes.demon.co.uk/js_info/pop_ups.html

Peter

[Randy Webb]

ASM said the following on 11/28/2006 8:53 PM:

<snip>

An other way (not allowed in 'strict' where target is forbidden)
This time you'll get a new window (JS or not) :

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('','here' ,'width=400');" >page</a>

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('',this.h ref);">page</a>

<g>

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

[marss]

John Pote wrote:

So my questions are,
1: is there any estimate available of the percentage of users not having
JavaScript available to them,

http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/November/javas.php

[Evertjan.]

Randy Webb wrote on 29 nov 2006 in comp.lang.javas cript:

ASM said the following on 11/28/2006 8:53 PM:

<snip>

>An other way (not allowed in 'strict' where target is forbidden)
This time you'll get a new window (JS or not) :

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('','here' ,'width=400');" >page</a>

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('',this.h ref);">page</a>

href position in window.open() is the first argumaent!

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="alert( window.open(thi s.href,this.tar get);"

>page</a>

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Randy Webb]

Evertjan. said the following on 11/29/2006 3:35 AM:

Randy Webb wrote on 29 nov 2006 in comp.lang.javas cript:

>ASM said the following on 11/28/2006 8:53 PM:

<snip>

>>An other way (not allowed in 'strict' where target is forbidden)
This time you'll get a new window (JS or not) :

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('','here' ,'width=400');" >page</a>

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('',this.h ref);">page</a>

href position in window.open() is the first argumaent!

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="alert( window.open(thi s.href,this.tar get);" >
page</a>

Oops!

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

[Evertjan.]

Randy Webb wrote on 29 nov 2006 in comp.lang.javas cript:

>><a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('',this.h ref);">page</a>

href position in window.open() is the first argumaent!

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="alert (window.open(th is.href,this.ta rget);" >
page</a>

Oops!

Sorry, I don't know what my alert( does there!

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[ASM]

Randy Webb a écrit :

Evertjan. said the following on 11/29/2006 3:35 AM:

>Randy Webb wrote on 29 nov 2006 in comp.lang.javas cript:

>>ASM said the following on 11/28/2006 8:53 PM:

<snip>

An other way (not allowed in 'strict' where target is forbidden)
This time you'll get a new window (JS or not) :

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('','here' ,'width=400');" >page</a>

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="window .open('',this.h ref);">page</a>

href position in window.open() is the first argumaent!

<a href="page.htm" target="here"
onclick="alert (window.open(th is.href,this.ta rget);" >
page</a>

Oops!

Y a des fois où je me demande ... :-(

There's times I ask myself "did they read or not ?"

and I do say :
this.href in window.open() is not necessary in my example up there
because same target is declared (in html and in JS).

Please don't try to bad correct what is OK (and quite simple).
How could understand and what will remember a newbie reading your comments ?
--
Stephane Moriaux et son (moins) vieux Mac déjà dépassé
Stephane Moriaux and his (less) old Mac already out of date