[elohesra]

>The point for me is, if the site uses so much javascript you can't even just see the text without javascript enabled, it's probably a bullshit experience. Or a neat WebGL demo. This is the former.

I totally agree with that, but I think it's a tangential point to the one I was making. I certainly think that developers should only use javascript where it's actually more convenient to do so than to use CSS, HTML and server-side code.

I personally find it extremely irritating navigating to sites which use javascript for something which naturally lends itself to another technique (like sites which request all text using javascript, as 'bphogan' pointed out above). When I visit sites such as these, it makes me feel like creating a parody site which draws the entire DOM in javascript just to illustrate the point that javascript is but one of the tools in the developer's toolbox.

The reason I get somewhat annoyed at noscript proselytizers (which I fully admit doesn't apply to any of the commenters in this thread), is that I've seen what happens when developers are forced to attempt to produce a stateful, interactive experience for the user without using (too much) javascript, and that thing is ASP.NET WebForms. As the line shrinks between desktop apps and web apps, we'll have to find ways to make overcome the web's shortfalls in interactive application development, namely state management and responsiveness. If the use of noscript increases, then this becomes harder to do, and makes it a lot less possible to make interactive web applications look like anything more than a poor mockery of interactive desktop applications. I truly want to see a time within the next few years where I can barely tell the difference between a desktop app and a web app, and unfortunately for noscript users, such an experience will probably require javascript.

[npsimons]

I truly want to see a time within the next few years where I can barely tell the difference between a desktop app and a web app, and unfortunately for noscript users, such an experience will probably require javascript.

That's fine; believe it or not, most NoScript users are enabling a good chunk of JS (usually for your exact example of web app). What's annoying is when one opens up a link that gives the user no clues whatsoever as to it's purpose, and all that happens is a blank page pops up. No indication, like on some sites, that hey, this site is interactive and requires JS. Just a blank page. It makes one wonder why the URL was even shared.