JavaScript: Difference between revisions

Line 13:

*'''Forced requirement''': Many webpages (and even entire websites), force the user to keep JS enabled, otherwise they break or deliberately refuse to work. In 2026, considering the advancements in HTML and CSS technology, there is minimal reason why an average website (excluding real-time simulations and low-latency gaming) would ''ever'' need JS. The only valid justification are [[wikipedia:Legacy_code|legacy code-bases]], as those are impractical to migrate to no-JS solutions.

*'''Degraded accessibility''': Dynamic and/or active content is well-known to have poor accessibility for users with visual and/or cognitive impairments. While standards such as [[wikipedia:WAI-ARIA|WAI-ARIA]] were created to mitigate this, it's no silver bullet, especially when developers aren't aware of ARIA.

*'''Lack of transparency''': To optimize network bandwidth, JS code is typically served in [[wikipedia:Minification_(programming)|minified]] form, which makes it harder to understand for humans. This is particularly problematic if the original source is not publicly [[wikipedia:Source-available_software|available]], which is typically the case of [[wikipedia:Proprietary_software|proprietary software]].

*'''Excessive tracking''': JS is much more capable than HTML and CSS '''combined''' to track user behavior, because of its first-class access to [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API user-agent (UA) APIs]. JS can communicate with almost any server (only limited by [[wikipedia:Cross-origin_resource_sharing|CORS]]) at any time (limited by connection availability), using a plethora of protocols. JS can get hardware information and compute a [[Device fingerprint|fingerprint of the device]], user, or both.

Line 31:

Line 32:

In January 2025, [[Google]]'s web-search engine mandates that user-agents must have JS enabled. Google's justification was that it's a defense mechanism against abusive bots (see also [[Deceptive language frequently used against consumers]]).<ref>https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/17/google-begins-requiring-javascript-for-google-search/</ref><ref>https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/01/18/google-search-javascript</ref><ref>https://serpapi.com/blog/google-now-requires-javascript/</ref> However, some people claim that it's an invalid justification.<ref>https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2025/javascript-required/</ref>

== Benefits ==

==Benefits==

It's worth noting that, while JS is trivial to misuse and abuse, JS can enhance the [[wikipedia:User_experience|user-experience]] (UX). The [[wikipedia:World_Wide_Web_Consortium|World Wide Web Consortium]] (W3C) provides comprehensive guidelines for such purposes.<ref>https://www.w3.org/wiki/The_principles_of_unobtrusive_JavaScript</ref>

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 *'''Forced requirement''': Many webpages (and even entire websites), force the user to keep JS enabled, otherwise they break or deliberately refuse to work. In 2026, considering the advancements in HTML and CSS technology, there is minimal reason why an average website (excluding real-time simulations and low-latency gaming) would ''ever'' need JS. The only valid justification are [[wikipedia:Legacy_code|legacy code-bases]], as those are impractical to migrate to no-JS solutions.
+*'''Degraded accessibility''': Dynamic and/or active content is well-known to have poor accessibility for users with visual and/or cognitive impairments. While standards such as [[wikipedia:WAI-ARIA|WAI-ARIA]] were created to mitigate this, it's no silver bullet, especially when developers aren't aware of ARIA.
 *'''Lack of transparency''': To optimize network bandwidth, JS code is typically served in [[wikipedia:Minification_(programming)|minified]] form, which makes it harder to understand for humans. This is particularly problematic if the original source is not publicly [[wikipedia:Source-available_software|available]], which is typically the case of [[wikipedia:Proprietary_software|proprietary software]].
 *'''Excessive tracking''': JS is much more capable than HTML and CSS '''combined''' to track user behavior, because of its first-class access to [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API user-agent (UA) APIs]. JS can communicate with almost any server (only limited by [[wikipedia:Cross-origin_resource_sharing|CORS]]) at any time (limited by connection availability), using a plethora of protocols. JS can get hardware information and compute a [[Device fingerprint|fingerprint of the device]], user, or both.
@@ Line 31: / Line 32: @@
 In January 2025, [[Google]]'s web-search engine mandates that user-agents must have JS enabled. Google's justification was that it's a defense mechanism against abusive bots (see also [[Deceptive language frequently used against consumers]]).<ref>https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/17/google-begins-requiring-javascript-for-google-search/</ref><ref>https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/01/18/google-search-javascript</ref><ref>https://serpapi.com/blog/google-now-requires-javascript/</ref> However, some people claim that it's an invalid justification.<ref>https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2025/javascript-required/</ref>
-== Benefits ==
+==Benefits==
 It's worth noting that, while JS is trivial to misuse and abuse, JS can enhance the [[wikipedia:User_experience|user-experience]] (UX). The [[wikipedia:World_Wide_Web_Consortium|World Wide Web Consortium]] (W3C) provides comprehensive guidelines for such purposes.<ref>https://www.w3.org/wiki/The_principles_of_unobtrusive_JavaScript</ref>