Aww, I was wondering if I was just looking at an older version. How disappointing. But I suppose, unsurprising given the conversation here. I'm sure such transitions would be bringing a surprising amount of instrumentation down.

It still probably is as it is now. But there's better arguments to support localization than transitions.

For some reason the localization still requires javascript... (I'm pretty sure the transition could have been done in just CSS as well)

> For some reason the localization still requires javascript

Well, no. The purpose of the redesign is to move as much of the page content as possible into an external javascript file. There's no question of what parts of the page require javascript; the question is what parts of the page can be moved into javascript.

Yes, the revised version that alternated through the translations was posted a week ago on Monday. It was revised to no longer do that on Friday based on reasonable feedback that it wasn't the best idea for accessibility. Now all the translations are presented together, but your preferred language will be bumped to the top based on your browser language preference.

Oh that's good, I had that complaint when it first changed. It was difficult to read the entire chunk of text before it transitioned to a different language. And then who knows how long it took to loop back round to english