Re: Re: phpsadness - P.C. shmee seee.

On 11-06-06 05:18 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:

On 6 June 2011 01:44, Robert Cummings<robert@interjinn.com> wrote:

On 11-06-05 07:28 PM, Richard Quadling wrote:

There is another approach. Regressive Enhancement. Essentially, create your site with all the bells and whistles enabled. Make full use of all / any standards compliant feature. For browsers not capable of supporting that, use emulation techniques. Sitepoint have a blog about this technique : http://blogs.sitepoint.com/regressive-enhancement-with-modernizr-and-yepnope/

From my cursory read... regressive enhancement would need to rely on progressive enhancement to work :) If there's no JavaScript to do the lifting, then how can you regress? An interesting read all the same. It's kind of like the compatibility layer PEAR releases for older versions of PHP so they have access to newer functions and stuff but implemented in PHP rather than C. Cheers, Rob.

If you were to start with a full bells and whistles HTML5/CSS3 site, then you would already have an issue with very very old and / or non visual browsers I think. If they don't have JS, then the level of FOOBAR is going to be even greater. So. Interesting but maybe useless.

But it's an established fact that websites can be presented without JavaScript. It may look old-fashioned, but everyone can view it. Even in Netscape 4 a site can be readable (even if ugly). Exclusively require JavaScript to view the content and this is no longer the case. That's the problem with regressive enhancement, it requires feature X to be enabled to facilitate the regression... which isn't very regressive. If it can be viewed in lynx then there's a good chance it can be viewed/read aloud by anything. Yes, you might not be able to view some HTML 5 canvas application, but there's nothing preventing you from having a paragraph with a brief description and a link to an image which is then progressively enhanced to the full blown HTML 5 canvas version. I think regressive enhancement is a good idea, just that one shouldn't throw out progressive enhancement when ideally (yes I'm an idealist :) the two would work best together...

    - vanilla website
    - progressively enhance
    - regressively enhance where feature Y can be implemented given
      that feature X exists.

Cheers, Rob. -- E-Mail Disclaimer: Information contained in this message and any attached documents is considered confidential and legally protected. This message is intended solely for the addressee(s). Disclosure, copying, and distribution are prohibited unless authorized.