WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Is javascript a big issue?

for

From: Terence de Giere
Date: Mar 15, 2004 1:57PM

Statistics on JavaScript vary a bit, depending on the source of
information. For the sources I use, the percent of users that have
JavaScript disabled or unavailable has varied from 4 percent to 13
percent, as measured over several thousand websites during the past
year. I do not know if this data includes repeat visits. As Paul Bohman
mentioned, if a user comes to a site and it doesn't work, they leave and
do not return. These statistics generally represent desktop/laptop
systems with graphical browsers. Text browsers are used much less now,
but they tend to be underrepresented in statistics, and users of such
browsers leave sites that make no sense in text, and do not come back.

To comply with accessibility regulations based on the W3C Web
Accessibility Content Guidelines, information provided to the user must
be equivalent whether or not scripting is on or off. For the U.S.
Section 508 regulations, "When pages utilize scripting languages to
display content, or to create interface elements, the information
provided by the script shall be identified with functional text that can
be read by assistive technology" a somewhat less clear way of stating
the same thing.

Another problem with JavaScript statistics - it does not include the
percentage of users who have JavaScript on, but for which the script
malfunctions. Usually developers make sure complex scripts work with the
most used browsers but such scripts often do not work with older
browsers, or non-Microsoft browsers outside of Netscape. From a
usability point of view, scripting can be used for important functions,
and if inaccessible, an alternative page provided. Scripting is often
used to provide a dynamic experience to a page by creating animations,
and other tricks to make a page look more lively, but from a usability
point of view, unless such things are germane to the content of the
site, they typically distract the user from the task or search at hand
and actually reduce the usability of the page. Scripts, if large, also
increase download time, and still, in the U.S. about 58% of users are
accessing sites at dial-up modem speeds with 10% using 28kB download
speeds or slower. Scripts sometimes double the download time of a page
if they are large. So even if the users have JavaScript on, and it
works, they might still bail out of the site because it is slow. Users
start to bail out after about 10 seconds. In an ideal hypertext system,
the time from page to page should probably be about 1 or 2 seconds, so
assuming fast broadband access download speeds to cram more 'glitz' or
functionality in a page is not necessarily going to make a site better
either.

The core value of any site is content, not 'glitz', and the ability for
the user to get that content easily. The goal of the web envisioned by
the founder of the web, Tim Berners-Lee, was access for everyone.
Building a site around a core content that is accessible meets this
goal. Once such a site is designed, adding additional functionality in
terms of scripting, multimedia to enhance the site can be done by
making sure each of these new items has a functional equivalent. If that
seems rather dull, the most usable web sites tend to be less spectacular
looking and acting than many of those out there on the web. But good
usable and accessible sites also should have a larger potential
audience, and especially a repeat audience. Look at the interface for
Google - no frills, no glitz. It is completely functional for its
purpose, and very easy to use.

Ask yourself these questions: Who are your users? What do these users
want and need from your site? What is the best way to provide this need?
In other words, the users' needs, not the technology envisioned by the
developer of a site, should be the determining factor in what
technologies to use. If the technology is used for its own sake, it may
backfire by reducing the number of users who stay on the site or who
return to the site. There was a company in England recently that redid a
site for a client. They made the site accessible. The result was an
increase in traffic of 30 percent; part of this was the result of better
search engine placement, and part from improved general access. Search
engines see web pages much like a disabled user. This is a pretty good
improvement.

Terence de Giere
<EMAIL REMOVED>




----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/