|
|
|
|
|
|
by jstummbillig
1018 days ago
|
|
|
What will need to happen that "but JS" stops being a self-serving argument? If it performance poorly, as with anything else, let's hear it. But I do seriously wonder: Is there a sport in breaking a websites legs and point at it, while it's lolling on the floor? I am not feeling it. |
|
|
Reinventing links detracts from the UX. You can't hover over the link and see where the link goes. Modifier keys often aren't respected meaning you can't open a link in a new window/tab with just one click. Fake links also break things like screen readers.
Reinventing the text widget means you're invariably going to miss something. Maybe you'll miss a "power user" feature like keyboard navigation. Maybe you'll miss something esoteric like rendering Chinese characters or find on the page. Maybe you'll break a rarely used feature like scrolling. Maybe you'll just display random characters.
To me it seems like a large part of the pain of requiring javascript is less about breaking nojs and more that devs are using javascript to poorly/partially reimplement key browser features. I'm reminded of the "Just normal web things" post the other day.