Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Jul 2007 19:50 UTC, submitted by juno_106
Opera Software "Back in January we added the ability to report usage of different features and preferences so we could learn more about how the browser is used in general. First we invited you, our weekly users to help us and in 9.2 we started asking one in 100 users if they want to participate. We would like to share some of our findings with you."
Thread beginning with comment 253594
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Javascript is not a secure and reliable solution for form validation. Validation has to be done server side as well before going into the DB. Therefore accepting a form only by javascript is dumb, when you can fall back to the action attribute on the Form to submit the same data through post and validate with the same code.

It is not increasing the complexity of everything by two, that's a total over exaggeration. I manage absolutely fine with a well written validation class that can accept both methods equally.

And people still don't understand. 99% of people may have Javascript on, but those disabled people who don't - have to have access by law. Can I say that again, as this is the third time someone has failed to realise that. It's the law. Not supporting graceful degrading (something that's been possible since 1996), is not worth 20'000 to me, comprende?

Edited 2007-07-07 01:18

Reply Parent Score: 5

sbergman27 Member since:

Javascript is not a secure and reliable solution for form validation.

Duh? Of course not. That's not what I'm talking about and you know it. But just to clarify so that I don't get more words put into my mouth, I'm not talking about fancy effects, fade ins, glows, beam ins and beam outs, or any of that silliness either. Nor am I talking about abuses of javascript by advertisers. (Though I find that adblock handles all that admiriably without throwing the baby out with the bathwater as turning off javascript does.)

What I *am* talking about is actual functionality. I am talking about web *apps* as opposed to web pages, as I mentioned in my original post.

By all means, code within the local laws, though. Even the poor ones that miss the mark.

But outside of the letter of the law, I really can't see banning web applications simply because assistive technologies need a kick in the pants.

Edited 2007-07-07 01:33

Reply Parent Score: 5