Hacker News Reader

It's a common philosophy for developers with standards of robustness and accessibility to not hard depend on js for things that don't need js to function.

> Why the target audience of the ruby, probably primary web developers, whould do that?

In my experience, it's mostly web developers who care about this in the first place.

View on HN

> mostly web developers who care about this in the first place.

I’m not sure what you mean by this. We care about our users and how they use our websites. JavaScript is everywhere and has been the de facto frontend standard for the past few years. Supporting no-JS is starting to feel like supporting a new browser. As much as I’d like to, from a business and product point of view, the numbers are just too small for us to even consider it.

I didn't imply that all web developers care about it, but that most of the people who care about it are web developers. I won't deny that it's still a minority.

I can understand the aspiration to have the system that can be run from the lowest level out of box tools, but then, I am doing frontend for almost a decade and this is porbably the first time I'm seeing such attention to this specific 'no js' use case, as in this thread.

Maybe I'm not reading enough webdev forums. I agree though that things that don't required js should be written in no js way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com