[bullant]

Originally Posted by rnd me

Another factor is cost. Despite some number thrown around about development, there are other costs associated with good javascript-less sites. Server-side scripting requires a host, which requires public registration, and usually credit-card payment for the plan.

I don't see hosting costs as an issue nowadays. There are many good free hosting providers around nowadays (also some dodgy ones). I use one of Awardspace's ( see the link in my signature if interested) paid plans but they also offer a free hosting plan with no ads and with access to PHP and MySQL all for free.

Originally Posted by rnd me

Also, Lots of folks don't know server-side languages, and the penalty for back-end mistakes is MUCH higher than it is for annoying client-side script errors.

I don't see the point you are making here. Looking at the posts in even just codingforums there are also a lot of people that don't know javascript.
And the penalties for javascript errors can be just as high or higher than server side errors, especially if it is a client-side only web site.

Originally Posted by rnd me

But, if you are like the increasing number of developers creating HTML5 applications, i don't see a static fallback as possible or frankly, even desirable. Imagine google docs or maps without javascript...

I think using html5 and css3 for commercial work is akin to playing with fire. You may or may not get burnt since html5 and css3 are not officially released by the w3c yet and are still in development. There is a good chance that html5 when it is released will at least in parts be different to what it is today. Also since browser support for html5 and css3 varies you are currently much more likely to run into browser compatibility issues with html5/css3.

Also, why are you talking about HTML3? HTML4 was born circa 1999 (from memory) and since today's developers seem to be younger and younger I suspect many have not seen or used HTML3 as they were still in nappies when HTML4 came around .

So what are we actually discussing in this thread? No-one is disputing that javascript can enrich a web page's user experience, so it's a "no-brainer" for me - if a functionality (data validation etc etc etc) can only be done using javascript then I use javascript, if it can be done either with javascript or server side I will always do it server side first, so that I don't have to have a Plan B for javascript disabled browsers, and then client side only if required as part of the web site specs.

Originally Posted by Philip M

@bullant - As you so often say, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

no problem - at least you agree it's only an opinion and so consequently not necessarily actual fact .