You might not need JavaScript

Re:You might not need JavaScript by dcw303 on Wednesday October 12, 2016 @03:40AM (#12691012)

The site makes no claims as such, but it undermines its own credibility if it uses .js files.

Surely they could have figured a way to do without them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You might not need JavaScript by Insanity on Wednesday October 12, 2016 @03:44AM (#12691026)

At the start of the article they do state that you might need javascript. The point was to show off things you can do without javascript, not say that you never need it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You might not need JavaScript by crashdown on Wednesday October 12, 2016 @06:32AM (#12691702)

Of course it doesn't undermine it's own credibility. If you turn off JS you'll see that the site still works. It's progressively enhanced using JS to give you examples of what is shown here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You might not need JavaScript by dontbethatguy on Wednesday October 12, 2016 @04:42AM (#12691265)

did you accidentally go to site called youshouldneveruseJS.com? Because I think we were talking about you-MIGHT-not-need-JS.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You might not need JavaScript by userbinator on Wednesday October 12, 2016 @04:10AM (#12691130)

Indeed, a bit funny for a site titled "You Might Not Need JavaScript" to itself use JS.

[ Parent | on HN ]