This article has the right idea. It's silly to build an entire site platform purely on AJAX-like navigation. AJAX should be an enhancement, not a replacement. Most of the sites out there have the right idea, but there's a few that take it too far. And no matter how beautiful your layout may be, the only thing that will always be the most important is content.
I love how standards gurus always bring up screenreaders. Are we really saying that web-based software has to be completely web standards and section 508 compliant?
shifttMay 30, 2006
This article has the right idea. It's silly to build an entire site platform purely on AJAX-like navigation. AJAX should be an enhancement, not a replacement. Most of the sites out there have the right idea, but there's a few that take it too far. And no matter how beautiful your layout may be, the only thing that will always be the most important is content.
echeeseMay 30, 2006
Shaun brings up a couple of good points. You should never depend of JS for content, and make sure your site can still function without JS.
7of7May 30, 2006
As Reagan Said-What was your name again?
freddiemilesMay 30, 2006
I love how standards gurus always bring up screenreaders. Are we really saying that web-based software has to be completely web standards and section 508 compliant?
kodeikoMay 30, 2006
'bout time someone talk about it once and for all.
usidoesitMay 30, 2006
Hold on a minute, I haven't even had a chance to use Ajax irresponsibly yet.
gking2224Jun 2, 2006
I have. I feel so dirty :-(This article (and others like it) have opened up my eyes to the error of my ways.
ssstevemacSep 12, 2007
I somewhat agree with,It is more than evil thinking make your site on AJAX-like navigation and never depend on JS for content coz content is the base not the layout.<a class="user" href="http://www.websites-design.com.au/">http://www.websites-design.com.au/</a>