On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > they really are placing the blame in the wrong place, very few web sites > really need to require javascript. It would have been nicer to see Mozilla > push back against sites requiring javascript to function rather than to make > it harder for people to reduce their risk of getting owned. Oh really? what about AJAX apps?. GMail? Twitter? 1. You miss the point: the Mozarella Foundation's Grand Plan includes pushing for HTML5 apps... "web pages" -static text content- is an endagered species, more and more web sites require JS for user validation, log-in, dynamic content, dynamic menus, etc. That's why also they are on a crusade against plug-ins, they want everything to be HTML5... 2. Can you cite some examples of "getting owned via Javascript"? > The images block is even stranger. Many sites look a lot better without > images. And it needs to be a really badly designed web page to break when > images are not loaded. Oh really? Thanks you saved my life. Now that you mention it, I prefer to read news without images, and shop amazon.com without pictures! You get a lot of exciting surprises that way! I also put a blanket in front of the TV. And I plan to put a bonsai tree in front of my netbook screen. Makes writing emails much more exciting. FC -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
