![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: xhtml 2.0 noscript
From: Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 19:24:30 +0200 Message-ID: <44C5024E.9080602@w3development.de> To: www-html@w3.org Steven Pemberton wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 16:57:40 +0200, Johannes Koch > <koch@w3development.de> wrote: > >> in HTML _and_ XHTML you can change the DOM by adding content via DOM >> methods. And you may need a noscript alternative then. So the need >> for noscript is not a difference between HTML and XHTML. > > No. With the DOM method, the whole document is the noscript content. > You don't need an element to identify it, you can modify it at will. I think, whether you need an alternative (noscript) for the scripting depends on what is done in the script. If essential functionality is added via scripting, a noscript alternative _is_ needed. -- Johannes Koch Spem in alium nunquam habui praeter in te, Deus Israel. (Thomas Tallis, 40-part motet)Received on Monday, 24 July 2006 17:25:15 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||