[RFC] Registration & Login Overhaul

[callumacrae]

I don't agree. Not all clients use JavaScript, and I don't believe people should be expected to use JavaScript either.

Too bad. phpBB DOES expect you to use Javascript.

Don't believe me? Turn off javascript and head on in to the ACP, and try to view permission masks and/or edit permissions. Or try clicking on a BBcode button or a smiley. Or try creating a post with an attachment or a poll.

You can't do any of those things, as phpBB and its default style Prosilver require Javascript for certain interactions already.

Turning off Javascript is akin to using a monochrome monitor these days. It's possible, but nobody in their right mind is doing it. To turn off javascript is to cripple your browser and absolutely diminish what the web has to offer. The option to disable it is an archaic vestige left over in browser preferences from a time when Javascript was new, untrustworthy and often used for illicit purposes. Those who do turn it off, deserve to have a limited and difficult experience (kind of like those who continue to use IE6 )

I disagree! When my Internet is being extra extra slow and te developer has put the script in the head, I often disable js. If something doesn't work, I would consider that to be a bug.

I notice that Facebook recently dropped support for non-js browsers

[naderman]

Don't believe me? Turn off javascript and head on in to the ACP, and try to view permission masks and/or edit permissions. Or try clicking on a BBcode button or a smiley. Or try creating a post with an attachment or a poll.

The admin style does indeed require JS for a few things that were hard to do without, but prosilver should work fine with javascript disabled.

phpBB must be able to operate without javascript to provide accessibility to people with disabilities who depend on browsers that don't support javascript at all, or at least not well. The javascript setting in browsers is going to stay for quite a while, and it's really not that funny to ridicule people who cannot use the web without it.

[sooskriszta]

phpBB must be able to operate without javascript to provide accessibility to people with disabilities who depend on browsers that don't support javascript at all, or at least not well.

It comes down to 99.99% people who have JS enabled v the others who don't. It is commendable that phpBB would want to support non-JS platforms for accessibility reasons, but does that mean that the other have to deal with a *crappy* experience? Why not do what Google does? Move on with improving the experience for the majority of the people, and for people still entangled in legacy systems, including some who don't have a choice, fall back onto a more primitive experience as supported by their infrastructure?

Besides, if phpBB takes accessibility issues that seriously, I can bet that there are more *accessible* ways than the JS-less system we are arguing about. e.g. In addition to the all-singing-all-dancing JS/jQuery-AJAX-HTML5-web2 system, there could be "text-only" type accessible fallback which would be much easier for say Text-to-Speech converters, or people with reduced motor function, etc

[phynixx]

I disagree! When my Internet is being extra extra slow and the developer has put the script in the head, I often disable js. If something doesn't work, I would consider that to be a bug.

I notice that Facebook recently dropped support for non-js browsers

A bug is something that doesn't work as designed. In this case we'd be making a conscious decision to not provide 100% support to those with JS off.

I don't think the use case of

the developer has put the script in the head

is a valid one to use to toss JS with though. If the script is screwed then the phpbb team will be promptly(!) informed a few hundred times, a work around will likely be quickly published, and then a patch afterwards i.e. broken script will be the odd, temporary, exception not the rule.

IMO in this day and age JS is a must. As previously mentioned, should we be seeking to support 100%, or is 99% (or even 90% really) an acceptable group to seek to please? Trying to make everybody happy is the surest way to guarantee failure.

[sooskriszta]

http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/po ... -disabled/

After filtering out automated requests (bots, scrapers, etc.), Yahoo analyzed traffic to their properties and concluded that 0.25% (Brazil) to 2% (USA) of people on the web have JavaScript disabled.

The average hovers around 1.3%.


October 13, 2010

[ecwpa]

phpBB must be able to operate without javascript to provide accessibility to people with disabilities who depend on browsers that don't support javascript at all, or at least not well. The javascript setting in browsers is going to stay for quite a while, and it's really not that funny to ridicule people who cannot use the web without it.

Come on, with only 2% there are more people with Flash disabled than Javascript. What are these people doing in the web?

Now, I get that registration and login screens are very important and must be accesible to all but some overhaul still can be done with javascript o ajax, like verifing if the passwords match before sending the form or checking if the email or username are actually available. phpBB users with javascript disabled won't see that and still could register. Same thing for posting in a topic, etc.

[callumacrae]

Come on, with only 2% there are more people with Flash disabled than Javascript. What are these people doing in the web?

accessibility.

Verifying if the passwords match before sending the form or checking if the email or username are actually available.

+1

[naderman]

When I said

phpBB must be able to operate without javascript

I meant exactly that. I did not say that we cannot add things like a javascript password check. All we need to make sure is that the board is still fully functional without javascript.

[VSE+]

I did not say that we cannot add things like a javascript password check. All we need to make sure is that the board is still fully functional without javascript.

I agree with you.

My whole thing is that there does not need to be a sort of visceral reaction against creating a richer user experience through things like javascript - just because it can be disabled. So there'll be a less cool fallback for the 1%...it does not mean we (the community) can't consider awesome and more modern enhancements for the other 99%.

[callumacrae]

verifing if the passwords match before sending the form or checking if the email or username are actually available

Some dev: Can I do this for 3.1?