tags:

views:

75

answers:

5

I am looking at redesigning my website and was wondering if I could get some opinions. I know that the rule is usually to design with users without JS first and foremost, but having looked at the stats, it appears 95% of the users online have JS enabled.

Would you recommend designing the website using JS and not bothering about people without it?

A: 

I would suggest going with a library like jQuery. It will fail nicley if there is no javascript. however, looking at the stats, there are very few people with javascript turned off and most are organizations. Such organizations have limits as to what websites they can go to anyway, and shouldn't be on your site at work.

You would be safe to use javascript, especially since this is a gaming website. I imagine your audience likes cool stuff. We are developing a site that is entirely dependent on javascript. Our analysis shows that practically everyone can view our site fine.

Dale
A very interesting answer. All the users I have asked so far have it enabled and would love to see better content.
Luke
+2  A: 

I suggest you make you make your JavaScripts degrade gracefully. Not only to make the site's content available for indexing by search engines, but also to make your site accessible to people who uses screen readers.

Gert G
+1  A: 

but having looked at the stats, it appears 95% of the users online have JS enabled.

Remember back when 95% of users used Internet Explorer and web developers designed their sites accordingly?

dan04
I don't see what's wrong with that
Anurag
A: 

Given your gamer audience I doubt you will have too many complaints if there are parts of your site that are inaccessible to those users who have JavaScript disabled.

That said, you should still consider taking some time to learn jQuery and the concept of unobtrusive JavaScript. It will require more time initially but you will also learn a marketable skill and the site will likely be easier to maintain in the future.

Mayo
unobtrusive javascript has nothing to do with degrading gracefully
Matt Briggs
@Matt: I'll concede that they are not the same thing, but given the lack of a formal definition for unobtrusive JavaScript I think it's arguable that they are related. I first learned about jQuery in Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework (Steven Sanderson) where he says on p. 427 about UJ: "...aiming to keep the HTML portion still functional in its own right" and "The key benefit is that it's still functional even for browsers that don't support JavaScript". The approach he describes may not be synonomous with UJ, but it's certainly related. :)
Mayo
Yeah, lots of people say lots of things about it. All it really means is pulling the javascript completely out of the html, the same way we completely pull styles out. Using things like onclick="" should be considered hacky, the same way using style="" is. You pull your javascript out into a .js file, and wire up event handlers when the dom is ready (if you use jquery, you can just use $(function() { //code }); shortcut). Anything past this may be a good practice, but it is still something different.
Matt Briggs
A: 

People who turn off javascript have to be used to dealing with a broken internet. It is like worrying about the people who monkey with your css, if they choose to browse your site in a non standard manner, their experience is not really your responsibility.

Matt Briggs