Richard Green wrote:
Charles McNulty wrote:
Well, obviously RC is highly dependent on javascript, which is totally browser dependent. I don't know to what degree if any mobile browsers implement javascript. In other words, single-clicking vs. double-clicking on a cell phone is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of problems using RC on a cell phone. I guess the question is, what browser does the cell phone use? (if it's even possible to get that info) , does that browser implement javascript? and is there a way to run that browser on a workstation instead of just a cell so that people can test it without having to get the phone?
-Charles
From my web logs, my phone reports itself as:
SAMSUNG-SGH-D500/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 UP.Browser/6.2.3.3.c.1.101 (GUI) MMP/2.0
But no, it doesn't support javascript.
I guess that you don't subscribe to the belief of gracious degradation then. To me javascript, while being capable of performing wonderful usability enhancing functions, should never be a requirement. Web pages and applications should be able to function perfectly well with JS disabled; JS can certainly be used to make things easier and flashier, but not at the cost of accessibility. I thoroughly recommend reading A List Apart http://www.alistapart.com; they have many many articles about accessibility, none of which advocates reducing your web site / application to an archaic state all in the name of accessibility.
I realise that the majority of the functions within the application rely on javascript and I am certainly not trying to say it should all be rewritten, but I think that you should at least provide the ability to READ e-mails for those people using browsers without javascript support.
Kevin L. wrote:
I totally understand and agree with Charles' response, and the last thing I would like to see would be hyper links all over the place as the current setup is quite beautiful
Never heard of CSS? How can something as innocuous as a simple hyperlink make a page ugly? If it's the underlines that bother you, CSS has a remarkable ability that can come to the rescue here...
I will have a play with this this weekend and I will try and see how the application functions with added hyperlinks. If I think I can get it to work without breaking any other functions then I will submit the changes to this list for comment.
Thanks, Richard
Obviously, you never read the email from Charles McNulty about degredation of the JS. I agree with Charles in his sentiments that this is is a Web 2.0 project, and it's a desktop type application, not a web page. You can use SquirrelMail or Horde if you want. That doesn't use JS. But why should a project that on the front page has a requirement as JS degrade for those that can't handle it. Not only would it delay the final release date, but essentially you'd have another webmail client, and not the one that I think Thomas has envisioned.
Degrading the JS is a good idea for regular web pages, but this is a web application, not a page. This is meant to be interactive and use Web 2.0 technology. I'm sorry, but I don't see why we should stop down to lesser tech just to satisfy a phone.... most of our users will be using computers and can enable JS for their email site.