Why Do I Have a Fear of Using JavaScript?

nick1

Greetings,

Consider this post more of a therapy session. I have this anti-javascript attitude that I've been carrying around with me for awhile and I really don't know why.

It's not that I don't understand javascript or don't think it's useful. Maybe my fear of it is based on other peoples opinions about it. As I write this, I'm recalling people I've encountered who have used phrases such as "evil javascript" or "eww, javascript" or "insecure javascript" when discussing web development.

Or maybe I avoid using javascript because of accessibility issues, meaning that a user can disable javascript in their browser if they choose. In doing so, part of my application is now useless to that user.

For whatever reasons I have been avoiding using javascript, I would like your thoughts on it. Do you avoid it too? If so, why? Or are you of the opposite frame of mind - you love to use javascript in your web development? Or maybe you use it only when necessary. Either way, I'd appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks,

Nick

leatherback

I personally do not like javascript. As you mentioned: People can have it switched off. Another browser may not understand it, and really.. When you want to be sure that something works.. Do it on the server, where YOU control what is interpreted how.

However, in some non-crucial situations (e.g., p[re-checking formfields) you could implement it. I personally don't. I rather feed back the form with selected options included than try to get a cross-browser valid JS to work.

EPJS

The only time I use JavaScript is when I am able to leave a fallback to those with JS turned off. I avoid using JS if a fallback can't be provided.

Here's an example of JS with a fallback:

<a href='#top' onclick='scroll(0,0); return false;'>Top of page</a>

With JS on it will just jump to the top of the page, with JS off it will jump to the bookmarked section of my site where #top is identified (in this case, at the top of the page)

Here's an example of "bad JS" (no fallback):

<a href='javascript:scroll(0,0)'>Top of page</a>

In this case, if JS is turned off the link won't work.

xblue

In my opinion, javascript is good for add-on features that may facilitate things but are in no way essential to use whatever the website offers.

Sometimes there are official recommendations to disable javascript because of some unpatched security issue, which always makes me mad because there are a lot of popular websites like airlines that would not even let you book a flight without javascript.

stolzyboy

it also is important if you know who your target audience is... where i work, i know who the users are and i know they aren't able to change anything in their browser, it's all controlled and the sites are used internally so we can use any/all JS stuff we want, so that is another factor you can think about...

as general web development where you can't control the target audience, i tend to stay away from JS

hth,
stolzyboy

Piranha

I would not have a problem with using JS for web development as long as it is not the only way to do something. And never trust the client to have it turned on. Using it to validate input data before it is sent (checking it again in PHP), creating a drop-down menu or other stuff is ok as long as you make sure that it is easy to use the site without JS as well.

Having said that I haven't gotten around to learn JS, so I'm not using it.

kebbelj

I LOVE Javascript for the following reasons.

It is an excellent tool for teaching computer programming to public school students.
a. Every kid who has a computer has the tool to write (any text editor) and interpret their scripts (any web browser)
b. It is simpler to learn and teach than C, C++, Java, etc.
c. Though it is easier than C, C++, Java, etc., a large part of Javascript--loops and branch structures--is almost identical to these more complex languages. Learning Javascript gives you a toehold in all these other languages.
You can accomplish wonders with Javascript using the client's processor.
Javascript applications are portable. Matrixes can store small, internal databases that can be picked up and moved without breaking any MySQL/text file connection.
While Javascript being turned off may hamper web applications, that can be a non-issue inside an intranet. Your web applications are lightning-fast (they're inside the web page) and accessible to everyone.

Weedpacket

As already observed, the main barrier to using Javascript is that it isn't necessarily available on the client, and so any functionality needs a non-JS workaround (though how many JS-using sites, legal requirements notwithstanding, actually do that?)

If you can be assured of Javascript functionality then it's invaluable; especially in recent years when it got a standardised API into the DOM instead of the masses of ad hoc flakery that used to be the norm.

A lot of the typical cosmetic stuff that Javascript is used for (pop-up menus and the like) could also be done using CSS (which is generally a faster and cleaner approach anyway). Unfortunately, there are still too many copies of Internet Explorer with hopeless CSS support floating around to do this without tiresome IE-specific CSS hacks (like IE7 still doesn't support the :hover pseudoelement on non-<a> tags).

greenie2600

JavaScript has a bad rap. It's been crippled for years by shoddy implementations and the widespread use of amateur cut-and-paste code, but it's really started coming into its own as a programming language. I've come to love it over the past few months - though, like any tool, you must understand its limitations to use it effectively. And, of course, it's vital if you're doing anything with AJAX.

If you plan on doing any serious JavaScript programming, I highly recommend using Firefox (for its actually-useable JavaScript console) with the Web Developer Toolbar add-on (for its "View Generated Source" function). (Of course, you'll want to test things in IE6 and IE7 to make sure they work, but as a development and debugging tool, Firefox is far superior.)

Thanks to these tools and the recent trend toward standardized implementations of JavaScript and the DOM, it's actually possible to write complex, robust, scalable JavaScript that never throws an error. As you and others have pointed out, it's not appropriate for every situation, but if you can be confident that all of your users will have JavaScript enabled (such as when writing an intranet app) or if you're only using it to provide enhanced functionality, it can be very useful. The principles of unobtrusive JavaScript (Google it - it basically boils down to the separation of the presentation/content layer of a page from the behavior layer) help greatly in this area.

As an example of what I mean by "enhanced functionality", I recently wrote a JavaScript class that finds every <input type="text"> field with a class of "date". For each one, it inserts a little calendar icon next to the field; clicking on the icon brings up a little calendar, from which you can select a date. Users who don't have JavaScript simply don't see the icon; they can still enter dates manually. I have another class that adds a little expand/collapse icon to any <fieldset> with the class "collapsible" - again, users without JavaScript just see a regular <fieldset>. Autocompleting text fields would be another example. Once you have a few classes like these, it's very easy to create rich, gracefully degrading interfaces without adding a single line of JavaScript to your HTML code.

Azala

I guess it comes down to where you live in the world.

In Norway people expect cutting edge technology and user functionality, hard to accomplish without using javascript/ajax etc.

People couldn't give a rats ass about their site being compatible with NS4 and frankly, how are you ever going to learn something new, and possibly make something exceptionally cool, if you are constantly held back by the fear of not being compatible with the last guy to upgrade.

Get your hands on some solid statistics and concentrate on the majority of your users, making their experience mind blowing instead of catering to every possible combo out there can be just as rewarding.

NogDog

Azala wrote:
I guess it comes down to where you live in the world.

In Norway people expect cutting edge technology and user functionality, hard to accomplish without using javascript/ajax etc.

People couldn't give a rats ass about their site being compatible with NS4 and frankly, how are you ever going to learn something new, and possibly make something exceptionally cool, if you are constantly held back by the fear of not being compatible with the last guy to upgrade.

Get your hands on some solid statistics and concentrate on the majority of your users, making their experience mind blowing instead of catering to every possible combo out there can be just as rewarding.

I don't think it's as much an issue of people using old browsers as it is of people turning JS off even in modern browsers. Whether or not turning JS off is a misguided attempt at increasing security, a sign of ignorance, or an indicator that they know something that the vast majority do not; the fact remains that some people do not have JS running on their browsers.

So if you assume that some small percentage of your site's visitors may not have JS, you need to decide if you need to cater to them, or ignore them. If the purpose of your site is simply "making their experience mind blowing", then by all means ignore them. If your purpose is to sell a product and you are not crazy about losing 5%, 3%, or even 1% of your potential sales due to a need to use all the coolest "gee-whiz" client-side effects, then you need to either eschew using JS, or if you do use it (which can have many valid advantages to helping make sales to the vast majority of users who do have JS enabled), then you need to put in some additional effort to ensure that your site is usable by those with non-JS user clients.

But it's all a matter of priorities: what you want to accomplish with your site, what the best estimate is of users who don't have JS enabled who might be potential users/customers on your site, and then weighing those and any other related factors to decide what the best design and implementation choices should be for each particular situation.

Weedpacket

Google doesn't do Javascript. You don't want to upset Google.

Azala

I can make up any potentional statistics I want.

I may loose 5% sales if I go for a solid old look work in all browsers solution because the user found it hard to navigate.
I may gain 5% sales if I go for the latest technology, but lose the potentional big sale because some guy at some company who wanted to place a huge order was still using pen and paper...

...and I could go on and on making up what could be or not...

That is why I say get your hands on solid statistics, with that you can tailor your site into whatever your users want to see.

Again, it's impossible to please everyone, it's impossible to design something that would ensure maximum sales for everyone everywhere in the world.

Go with the majority 🙂

P.S Don't forget some of us are actually on a budget with our clients, we got a certain amount of time to accomplish something with the money we're being payed, make the most of it.

EPJS

Piranha wrote:
creating a drop-down menu

What I find annoying is when people use JS in drop-downs, when it is soooooo easy to make a drop-down that doesn't require JS.

In fact, it's about twice as easy to make a drop-down with no JS than it is to make one with JS.... yet some people are too "JS happy" I suppose. :rolleyes:

EPJS

NogDog wrote:
Whether or not turning JS off is a misguided attempt at increasing security, a sign of ignorance, or an indicator that they know something that the vast majority do not

I use the "no-script" extension for Firefox to chose which sites to allow to use JS (off on all sites by default) because some sites are just so bloody annoying with JS on. There are some sites with endless alert pop-ups, sites that adjust your browser window, sites that disable your context menu (right-click menu). So many annoyances JS can bring.

Weedpacket

EPJS wrote:
In fact, it's about twice as easy to make a drop-down with no JS than it is to make one with JS....

And let's not start in on the people who make it in Flash.

I've seen Flash used for two-frame image button rollovers. Really. What was that about working within budgets? 🙂

EPJS

lol that's a really pointless piece of Flash. Image rollovers can be done in either JS or CSS (I prefer to use the CSS approach).

NogDog

EPJS wrote:
lol that's a really pointless piece of Flash. Image rollovers can be done in either JS or CSS (I prefer to use the CSS approach).

Would you care to share with us your secret to creating JavaScript-free drop-downs. I know how to do them with CSS, but you always have to add at least a little JS so that the ignorant IE browsers can deal with the concept of :hover pseudo-classes used on elements other than <a>.

madwormer2

<select>?

Maybe that's what he means, maybe not 😛

I still use document.all, so what do I know 😉