Javascript dependence

[malbro]

Norman and Gabe are secretly coding it all in BASIC at the moment ... it will be compatible with Windows 3.11 and all Sanyo Digital Watches.

So V10 will be DOS based then

[Chunkford]

Na, it will be for GEOS

[Mike Hughes]

If it was stripped out of Actinic what would the replacement be? Replacing it with something else would most likely bring issues to other users.

It's a no brainer, keep javascript in. What do we replace it with flash????

?

AFAIK There isn't any in Actinic to strip out. Other than a few menu options.

Mike

[guccij]

I get quite a few orders from people with javascript disabled as the address and postcode capitalisation code on the checkout is clearly not being given a chance to run.

Same here - but it's maybe only one in 50 orders, which is the 2% others have mentioned. It's an insignificant number. It would impact on us a lot more if our website couldn't have javascript coded in.

[gabrielcrowe]

Javascript (ecmascript) is as much a part of the web as html, saying that you need to have it turned off is like saying 'lets not advance the web, and lets keep it simple'.

If a device is not capable of exdcuting JS on a page, then imho, its not a web browser at all, its a html rendering platform. The role of a web browser has changed, and its not 'mosaic' any more.

Almost all mobile platforms support script even in ancient wap stack based pages, and every major browser supports it. The reason people have it turned off, is due to either a fault in their system, or a security concern, that would never be there in the first place, if it weren't down to the general insecurity of our favourite platform.

Don't consider removing the javascript from Actinic, its a daft idea. Work out the maths on how annoyed the rest of your customers will feel, not being forwrded to the right place, and to PSP's etc, and see what percentage of business loss you get after that.

[leehack]

Actinic uses JS for blocking unregistered customers from the contact us page, for the cookiecheck, for the auto submit on PSP bounce pages, for Google Analytics, plus the actiniccore and extras file. It uses it for far more than just menus.

[Mike Hughes]

Ok, fair point. But the key point here is that none of this is core functionality. Actinic will work and take orders without it.

The question isn't about stripping javascript out though but whether it's acceptable for the website to not function without it.

Mike

[leehack]

I must admit I didn't think an actinic site could function without it, so my eyes have been opened if that is not the case.

[Mike Hughes]

It does. As Jules and I have said we can see the orders where this is the case as there's no address formatting happening during checkout.

And I think this is the key issue behind the original question. Should Actinic create a dependence on Javascript so that the site won't function without it?

I'd rather they didn't as I do see these orders coming in (and I'm sure there are others where customer just format their address properly so I don't notice them).

Of course, if the added functionality meant an increase in sales then maybe this would outweigh the disadvantages. I'd still prefer the core functionality to be independent of javascript.

Right now I use javascript for various functions myself, but I know that at the most basic level a customer can navigate the site and place an order without it.

Mike

[leehack]

I guess in my head if things like the cart summary do not show anything, then to me that looks like a broken site, so I incorrectly perceive that it cannot operate without it, when in reality it can, it's just not as good or intuitive.

It's a shame that anyone has this blocked or not available to use, JS is predominantly to enhance their experience, nothing else. Would be great to interview these people and see if they even know.

[zmagyar]

Just to clarify on the issues here. Actinic is not planning to remove js or to replace it. The reson behind the question was that we are thinking about the extension of the current js usage.
But obviously we need to be really careful here. If Actinc relies on js that certainly affects x% of your shoppers. I wrote x% because the above mentioned percentages are visitos and not shoppers. We need to investigate the impact even before we start planning anything on this field. So we thought it's better asked here. :-)

[brucet]

And I think this is the key issue behind the original question. Should Actinic create a dependence on Javascript so that the site won't function without it?

That's the question exactly, Mike. There is no question of removing Javascript, but whether it's acceptable for an ecommerce site to use Javacript for core functionality, and effectively be Javascript dependent.

The percentage I quoted for surfers without JS comes from the most recent research I could find, it was a year ago and showed the figure pretty level over a couple of years after a historical decline:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

It's consistent with what we see on our own site, but it's bound to vary between sites, and I'm not surprised if it's lower for more consumer-focussed sites than our own. It wouldn't surprise me if it's slowly declining, but I have no evidence for that.

I agree 1-2% is insignificant, 5% probably not. Would you sacrifice one in twenty orders in the current climate?

I did check out a number of popular top-ranking online stores - Amazon, Argos, Tesco, M&S and John Lewis. Argos point you to a different link if you don't have Javascript. But all of them enable you to make a purchase without it, as does Actinic.

[grantglendinnin]

Bruce,

It may well be worth noting that the stats published on W3C.org are solely visitors to their site from their own server logs, as detailed in their terms. You can guess why their stats are at 5% - the vast majority of their visitors will work in the IT industry and many of those in the security sector.

[RuralWeb]

I see 2% of the 2% of visitors without java actually making a purchase so they can order without java but they are not heavy shoppers! I suspect the are from users of corporate systems so locked down and using ie 5.5 that thier view of the Internet is totally abstract and not worth restricting further advancement of actinic just to maintain thier declining purchases.

W7 is almost here and most corporate networks will upgade when service pack 1 is released so the java problem will reduce again IMO

[malbro]

That's the question exactly, Mike. There is no question of removing javascript, but whether it's acceptable for an ecommerce site to use javascript for core functionality, and effectively be javascript dependent.

My two pennyworth. A web based package should use php in preference to javascript, for every site there is one server (for small businesses) to thousands of browsers. PHP runs on the server, javascript runs on the browser, so it makes sense to use PHP to limit the potential for problems, but that said if the functionality can't be coded in PHP e.g. handling cookies, then use javascript, but design it to degrade gracefully for browsers that are not using javascript.