[thelist] targeting effectively

[Erik Mattheis]

>requiring javascript for the popup window is absolutely ridiculous
>and unnecessary.  simply using a target attribute you'll get a new
>window.  oh sure, you don't get a popup with all the chrome tuned
>the way you want, but so what.

I came to this project at the tail-end the pop-up/no pop-up
discussion ... I'd  actually like you to repost your method of the
near fail-proof link to a JavaScript function ... I remember it as
being really cool.

A caveat: I could imagine situations where it would be better to
leave people with JS off cold than allow them to see something other
than was intended.

>i fail to see how using javascript in an exclusionary manner is
>going to improve the company's bottom line.
>
>all the following scenarios begin with the following:
>
>average joe user encounters your client's site.  he's using a
>browser that has javascript disabled (his son is paranoid of those
>sorts of things and turned it off without telling dear old dad).  he
>sees you offer an online configuration tool.  he eventually finds
>his way to the page where it can be opened. he finds the link/button
>to open it, ...

The "bottom line" for all your counter examples is:

The gain from something that will only work for a portion of your
visitors may be greater than the loss incurred from excluding some
visitors.

Yes, some things that you can accomplish with JavaScript can also
degrade so they work without JS (or whatever).

Jeff, I really admire you for your coding, but it seems to me that
thinking "If you can code it to work everywhere, it's the right thing
to do" is flawed. And that seems to me what you're saying. There are
other variables ... whether it's within a budget or manageable to
create a "degrading" version; whether showing the visitor something
similar to what you intended is worth it at all.

>with the myriad of browsers out there that support javascript at
>varying levels, i think it'd end up costing more to support a
>smaller set of users than if you'd done it server-side to begin with.

Well, yeah, when it comes to doing something server-side or
client-side, server side is with few exceptions the better solution
... but obviously you can't do everything serve-side. At least now,
3/25/2002.

Like again, I think you're one if the strongest features of thelist,
but in the days of gopher and 0.002 baud (http://www.samizdat.com/)
being cutting edge, quoting your replies with

>  ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

would have been considered catering to the elite.

>understandable coming from a guy who makes a fair amount of his
>income from the use of flash.  ;p
>
>myself and my clients would prefer to put their message in front of
>as many users as possible.

If it could make an emoticon that would mean: "long extended
PPPPPPLLLLBBBBBBTTTTT" with lots of flying saliva, I would. Then I'd
buy you another drink.
--

__________________________________________
- Erik Mattheis

(612) 377 2272
http://goZz.com/

__________________________________________