"M" == My mom writes:
M> Pretty fascinating -- I gave it good ratings.
But there's nowhere to put ratings.
M> Yes, there is -- at the end of the Wikipedia website you sent me.
Ah, those wily Wikipedians embarrassing me in front of my billion year old mom.
Indeed, one finds not a single <noscript> on the entire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement page, nor I bet on the entire http://en.wikipedia.org/ .
That despite it being part of "A minimal example of a standards-conforming web page containing JavaScript", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Example_-_use_in_web_pages and Wikimedia blogging day in and day out about accessibility, etc.
No I'm not saying there should be a single disclaimer for the whole site, to let them off the hook, but instead useful links or at least mentions of each item one is missing out on.
On 17/07/11 04:19, jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
"M" == My mom writes:
M> Pretty fascinating -- I gave it good ratings.
But there's nowhere to put ratings.
M> Yes, there is -- at the end of the Wikipedia website you sent me.
<snip> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement page,
Indeed the "Article Feedback" panel seems to be appended to the end of the page through JavaScript. Still, when using a text browser / having JS disabled, it degrades nicely in the sense you have nothing showing.
"AV" == Ashar Voultoiz hashar+wmf@free.fr writes:
AV> Indeed the "Article Feedback" panel seems to be appended to the end of AV> the page through JavaScript. Still, when using a text browser / having AV> JS disabled, it degrades nicely in the sense you have nothing showing.
What if the IRS's tax refund box degraded nicely so that nothing showed? What's so nice about that? Or fair? Not the slightest hint afforded to the user that they are missing out on something.
Nobody values <noscript> here on this mailing list. They probably never even heard of it on the Wikipedia mailing list.
jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
"AV" == Ashar Voultoizhashar+wmf@free.fr writes:
AV> Indeed the "Article Feedback" panel seems to be appended to the end of AV> the page through JavaScript. Still, when using a text browser / having AV> JS disabled, it degrades nicely in the sense you have nothing showing.
What if the IRS's tax refund box degraded nicely so that nothing showed? What's so nice about that? Or fair? Not the slightest hint afforded to the user that they are missing out on something.
Nobody values<noscript> here on this mailing list. They probably never even heard of it on the Wikipedia mailing list.
Well, the reason is that such things shouldn't have been done in javascript to begin with...
On 18/07/11 03:50, jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
What if the IRS's tax refund box degraded nicely so that nothing showed? What's so nice about that? Or fair?
Fill it manually and send it to: Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service Austin, TX 73301-0215 USA
Not the slightest hint afforded to the user that they are missing out on something.
Nobody values<noscript> here on this mailing list. They probably never even heard of it on the Wikipedia mailing list.
Most probably because most people on this mailing list use a modern browser or at least a graphical one. This does not mean that your point is invalid, just that probably nobody cares but you :-(
If you really care about <noscript> for the flagged rev: -> please be bold and send us patches
If you do not know how to code: -> find someone to do it for you
In any case please stop bothering us on this list.
mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org