[whatwg] RE: Degrading of web applications

Chris Were chris.were at gmail.com
Thu Sep 9 20:43:32 PDT 2004

> >...whereas I believe
> > you were referring to the ability of future web applications to
> > degrade nicely to current browsers.
> No, I make no such distinction, degradability is still important -
> obviously it depends on your requirements, ...
I completely agree degradabiliity is extremely important.... just not
in every instance.

> Degradation doesn't mean absolute duplication of behaviour, it just
> means the content or functionality is available, often you can achieve
> this just by making sure your fancy behaviour is kept away from the
> content and doesn't get in the way.
I think this mention of fancy behaviour is the key. What I am talking
about by a web application is a *single* page where all server
interaction occurs through XMLHttpRequest. In this instance all
functionality of the particular application is provided through
javascript - a collection of fancy behavious all combined to make the
application. Browsers that do not support javascript can not use the
application. As such it means nothing for that web application (in
this case just one page) to degrade as there is no content to view and
no functionality available.

>> The point I was
>> making is that current web applications don't have a requirement to
>> degrade nicely for older browsers if they're built using technology
>> only available to the latest browsers.
>What sort of technologies are you talking about?  the xmlhttprequest
>object for example can easily degrade - easier than most things of
>course as it can truly control the HTTP headers.
I was referring to this particular of example of a web application not
general web applications as a whole - which I didn't make clear.


More information about the whatwg mailing list