[whatwg] no <noscript> proposal

Kornel Lesinski kornel at ldreams.net
Mon May 30 09:12:34 PDT 2005

On Mon, 30 May 2005 08:14:05 +0100, Anne van Kesteren  
<fora at annevankesteren.nl> wrote:

> He's correct for a bit though. If you have the following element:
>   <div id="noscript">
>    <p>Foo bar, etc.</p>
>   </div>
> You could easily remove that DIV from the flow using javascript. And  
> when javascript is disabled it would show up. Of course, compared to  
> NOSCRIPT this is suboptimal at best.

I don't see many real uses for <noscript>. Mostly because <noscript> is  
very primitive:

* doesn't work when script-aware browser lacks neccessary DOM or  
XMLHTTPRequest support.
* doesn't let you reuse its contents, so that's always "wasted" bandwidth  
(browsers don't put contents of <noscript> in DOM tree)
* doesn't work with multiple script types

Today most scripting solutions use progressive enchacement and don't need  
<noscript> at all.

Decent dynamic menus work by transforming nested lists of links.  
Maintaince of <noscript> alternative would be wasted effort.

sFIR and flashObject degrade nicely without <noscript>.

Actually you don't have to look far - entire WebApps specification is  
designed this way!

regards, Kornel Lesinski

More information about the whatwg mailing list