Techno Babble II

Yep, I validate server-side with php.

But I was talking about fade in/fade out/sliding effects yea. It's a shame you can't do anything about it. Good to know, thank you.

The majority of js that you see on the web is completely pointless ... see the twitter example, they require js to (validate and then) submit the form and yet (as you should) they also validate the data server side, via a normal <form> submit ( ie/ no ajax that could save the odd char or two ), seriously pointless ;)

What visual effects do use js for? ... unless you mean "fade in" "fade out" kind of effects. In which case you can't, that's the "enhance"ment bit, but your page should fail open and you should (always) validate serverside as well.

¥

Hey,

Great post, and I definitely agree with everything.

Would you care to elaborate on using html and server calls to substitute for JS? Is it possible to get visual effects that are done with JS to work even when users have JS disabled on their browsers?

Thank you.

This is from my droid which sucks to type on

never mind. I just deleted everything. It failed again, I'm done with it.

Oh and those who slate you, which is a neat way to express the thought, only do so because you're violating their religion. They believe js is god almighty and are therefore not open to hearing anything different.

We need js like we need oregano. Nice, but I'm pretty sure you won't die without it.

I question the validity of "95% have js enabled". BROWSERS might have it but how do you know the actual human has kept it for untrusted sites? To me that sounds exactly like webmasters in the 90s who said they didn't need to worry about their pages in other browsers because 95% of their traffic used IE.

My opinion is if the site fails without js then the site fails.

But to focus on your question, are you talking public side or admin side? quicktags needs no js on the public side. Smilies do for some silly reason, but they degrade gracefully so no problem. The navbar needs js but you've got to be logged in to need it so if you still don't trust a site you're registered at you've got problems. A toolbar for commenters MIGHT need js, but hey that's what the noscript tag is for. Therefore I think it would not be worthwhile unless it's easy to do.

OK, shortly;

it definitely would.

we gotta find out which are "essential".Tidying the BO is one of them i believe, [s](as afaik admin area requires js enabled already it wont be much of a problem, we just need to decide on the amount of to be used modules/improvements)[/s] whereas i dont think [i]any[i] kind of functionality should be imposed on the front end.

Ok, can we pretend that we're beyond the whole off topic debate of number of users with and without js enabled and actually try and answer the question that I first posted?

anyway, on the grounds that some things require js just to function ( quicktags, smilies, any other button that adds shit when you click it ), would it be worth creating some standard javascript modules that made life easier, and should we use jquery

¥

i thought we were over this, we had this discussion a couple of times, and i ve said that i also agree that js should not be mandatory to access any web page properly, allthough i see of no reason to have it disabled as default, and enable at certain situation, it has gotta be the other way around.
and no not the 95% of the browsers have the *ability* to run javascript, i suppose 99.9% of them support, and 95% of the users have js enabled.Though this information may not be *totally* accurate; the more or less, it's a huge number to prove that you are being paranoid.If js were to be harmful and able rape people online i guess we would know already by the 95% of the internet users.

Conclusion, I never gave a shit before about people those have js disabled, i always assumed their number were too small to worry about, but, even if that is 5 percent, that is a considerable amount of people to have concerns about given the number of internet users.

Yes, we should always make sure everything runs smoothly without js, and you gotta accept you are a minority :p

95% of browsers have the *ability* to run javascript ;)

The majority of users without js aren't paranoid, it's a lack of capability in their browser.

Javascript should never be "needed" it should only make things better or easier, but, the topic is "how can we make the javascript side of the equation easier?" not "should we use javascript" ;)

¥

"95% of all browsers have javaScript enabled."
"optional is "disable js" ;)" - yabs

cool, seems we could compromise on the matter that having js disabled is a paranoid(irregular) action unlike the rest of the crowd.

so, i believe the way to go is to determine the priorities and have as much jquery as needed.

Tilqi :
optional is "disable js" ;)
one of the end goals is to make admin work far better, but the modules would be usable by anything that called them.

Afwas :
I've zero problem with javascript being used for functionality but it should *always* be an enhancement to the "click > wait > click". Or a feature improvement like the smilies toolbar, if you have js enabled you get to click on cute lil images. If you have it disabled then you can still type them in manually.

Once QP has a template that we're happy to call "a starting point" I'm more than happy for us to start playing ajax/jquery games with it and seeing if we can make the world gasp in awe ;)

¥

I've seen one WP skin that was completely built with javaScript. Though it looked nice and had some cunning features, overall it felt sluggish and unresponsive.
If you build a skin using some jQuery it wouldn't be slow with todays browsers and hardware. The possibilities you create are endless and never dreamt about in the B2evo community. Ajax could provide all sorts of real time action. All sorts of rubbish could be removed (at least from view). The visitor, not the blogger, could hsve a say in the way he wants to view the content.
B2evolution skipped the Web2.0 revolution altogether. Most often it was the 'non obtrusive' argument and sometimes those in charge ignored the fact that over 95% of all browsers have javaScript enabled.
¥åßßå, it's 2010 and you're spreading the same ideas using exactly the same arguments and terminology the day we first talked about this. In the years that passed I have shown with many jQuery based plugins that all sorts of effects are possible, all fast, beautiful to look at and unobtrusive. The one thing we never did was build that skin together that relied on javaScript and would shock the community being not just a small step but a giant leap into the future.

What have I been smoking?

well, we could make it "optional" and go nuts with jquery all over the place, or we could find a middle ground and make them default.I guess i d go with keeping it as is, and making all the jquery stuff optional; in case, there are any other paranoid blokes out there that feels they are enforced to have js enabled.better than trying to decide which are definitely necessary and which are not.

As far as those functionalities goes, they are very likely to make the back office less scary, and more easy to use.Basically, tabs that you can close/expand, admin blocks that can be toggled in order to save you some place, resizable writing area could make the life easier.On the other hand, i dont think we should use of much jquery by default in front end, the user should choose which skin he likes judging by those "functionalities" as well as the looks.

Who read instructions? :o

And add that to a Yabba + Moderation == never heard of and you're getting more FG like, every day! :-p

/me points to the highly informative line just above the textarea :|

¥

LMFAO - moderation!! :-p

(waits 30 seconds so that I'm not considered to be "flooding") :-\

The hit summary is pretty with it's flash graph and provides a fairly quick look at "basic numbers".

The only other tabs in statistics that I look at on a regular or semi-regular basis are the Search-Browser hits and Referred Browser hits.

The rest (which includes: Browser Hits, Direct Browser Hits, Robot Hits, XML hits, User Agents, referring domains and Sessions), could all be binned, IMO.

Referring domains might be the only one of the lot I'd keep and if so, might be nice to include a pie chart with it and/or find some way to integrate both "referred browser hit" data with "referring domains" in a single "referrer hits" page.

Yes, the stats aren't accurate (which are?) and take up a whack-load of table space, but it's nice to have a "quick picture" set in the back-office, if only because I'm there way more often than I'm visiting AWStats in cPanel.

You have waaaaaay to much time on your hands ;)

¥