On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Mark Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > Brian Walters wrote: > >>Quoting Bruce Walker <[email protected]>: >> >>> Only a few curmudgeons -- a high percentage of the PDML makeup -- >>> complain about Javascript, technology which is as much a part of the >>> web underpinnings as HTML and CSS. I expect more than a few still >>> mutter about content vs form while browsing. Any web design done wrong >>> is annoying, not just JS. >> >>I wear my curmudgeon-ness with pride! >> >>Having said that, I use a bit of Javascript on my own website - >>there's no rule that says I have to be logical or consistent :-)> - >>but at least the images on my site still show up if JS is disabled. > > Quite right. There's nothing wrong with a bit of JavaScript. What I > object to is JavaScript that loads other JavaScript from third > parties. Some of that, in the case of Flickr, seems to itself load > still more JavaScript from *fourth* parties. The security risk becomes > too great at that point. > > If I'm visiting whatever.com I'm usually OK with running JavaScript > from whatever.com. If the JavaScript at whatever.com tries to load > JavaScript from somewhere-else.com I'm cautious. And if the JavaScript > from somewhere-else.com tries to load JavaScript from > who-knows-where.com I'm outta there.
Loading JS from 3rd-parties is an optimization and widely used these days. Lots of people code to load their most common packages (like jQuery and Protoype) from Google because: 1. it's pretty much guaranteed to be there 2. it'll likely be cached by proxy servers for quicker access 3. if everyone does this your browser will only download a single copy instead of hundreds. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
