At 8:36 AM -0400 6/6/11, Robert Cummings wrote:
On 11-06-06 05:18 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
On 6 June 2011 01:44, Robert Cummings<robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
To all:
+1
Rob is right-on (as usual, he's annoying that way).
Start basic and progressively enhance. If you do it the other way,
chances are that you'll screw up along the way.
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com/
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
