Why doesn't CC work without out Javascript?

[Guest]

I find this the worst aspect of CC.

Not being able to shop without Javascript! Ridiculous in this day and age. From my stats, that's 5 to 10% of customers we are turning away!

Most other Carts offer this.

Is there anything that can be done about this. Seriously...

[Robsta]

Javascript is a standard technology, and supported in most if not all browsers now. How can you tell they are being turned away because of a Javascript requirement rather than being customers who just don't want to spend their money?

[Guest]

There was a time when JavaScript was horribly insecure. Such is not the case now. There is no plausible reason to not use JavaScript. So many of the current technologies on the web support and require it's availability now.

:blink:

[Guest]

Okay

You can't add to basket or buy anything with JS off. So this is turning customers away.

All the major stores use JS but they still work with it off.

And it's not a matter of it being insecure and whatever, it's the fact of people still browsing with it turned off, just like people are still using IE5.5.

It should work with JavaScript off.

[Robsta]

Okay

You can't add to basket or buy anything with JS off. So this is turning customers away.

All the major stores use JS but they still work with it off.

And it's not a matter of it being insecure and whatever, it's the fact of people still browsing with it turned off, just like people are still using IE5.5.

It should work with JavaScript off.

IE5.5 is incredibly insecure (and no longer a supported technology for years), but Javascript did work on it. Your same argument can be made for images, for cookies, for ActiveX. If people want the best out of their internet experience, they need to use currently supported technologies (and have them enabled). You can't continually create websites or stores for browser technologies that are so outdated and nolonger supported.

I ask again, what makes you think your customers are being turned away because of a Javascript requirement rather than being customers who just don't want to spend their money?

[Guest]

Maybe there is a misunderstanding to this question.

I agree that it would be good if everyone had JS turned on. But they don't. Whether it is outdated to turn JS off is neither here nor there. Disabling JS is not actually outdated, just a habit to many. People do it and I know a few, even though I wouldn't do it myself.

I know what you mean about customers not wanting to buy things. What I mean is if a customer comes to my site with JS disabled, I they really do want to buy something, they cannot add a product to the basket. So that means they cannot buy anything from my website. Does this make sense?

Also there are disabled people who have it turned off, screen readers, text browsers etc. Under new laws this could bring us into problems.

It's about accessibility.

[Robsta]

Maybe there is a misunderstanding to this question.

I agree that it would be good if everyone had JS turned on. But they don't. Whether it is outdated to turn JS off is neither here nor there. Disabling JS is not actually outdated, just a habit to many. People do it and I know a few, even though I wouldn't do it myself.

I know what you mean about customers not wanting to buy things. What I mean is if a customer comes to my site with JS disabled, I they really do want to buy something, they cannot add a product to the basket. So that means they cannot buy anything from my website. Does this make sense?

Also there are disabled people who have it turned off, screen readers, text browsers etc. Under new laws this could bring us into problems.

It's about accessibility.

Yes there are accessibility laws, but they cannot be enforced against small businesses. Doing so will likely bankrupt the business or force them off the web. In my opinion those laws were made by bureaucrats with as much knowledge of websites as a squat squirrel. They are unmanageable.

It should be the developers of those technologies the disabled use who should be 'encouraged' to make their software more compatible with common website languages. More Government incentives for the writers of software for the disabled, rather than huge fines for small businesses trying to earn a living who have a javascript 'add to cart' button that don't work with Javascript disabled. Just my opinion. I detect a stealth tax.

[Guest offthehook]

If your stats include visiting search engine bots then they will not have javascript enabled, which may account for a significant portion of that 5–10%. Notwithstanding the fact that browser stats are notoriously unreliable and are best just an indicator of probable trends.

There will be a percentage of surfers who disable javascript for security reasons. Its a bit of an outdated practice however I think it would be logical to assume that those people are unlikely to be online shoppers.

Screenreader software such as Jaws can actually use javascript, which may be a surprise to some people. I suggest that if you are interested in what a screenreader is or does that you download the demo from the Jaws website. It will be a real eyeopener (no pun intended) to experience how users of this type of software enjoy the web.

Having used Lynx and one or two other text browsers I would conclude that very few people would be using them to do their shopping with.

Its unlikely that anyone will be facing legal action for their sites not meeting accessibility laws, as there are literally millions of websites that would potentially face prosecution.

All that said, for designers and developers of stores it is good practice to make your site as accessible as possible. Currently with Cubecart you can deliver a valid XHTML site and deliver Section 508 accessibility, but cannot operate without javascript enabled.

In order to offer a better service store owners should make sure they offer more than one method of payment, ie accept orders by phone, email or by post. And you should be making this clearly visible upon visitation to the site, so shoppers don't have to hunt for information. I suspect that as well as those with javascript disabled there are those who are still not sure about using credit cards online, so its about giving all shoppers not only the choice how they shop but the opportunity to shop.

[markscarts]

Very good points, hook

@delicious, my own perspective: I surf the web with js disabled; call me outdated, I really don't care what you call me as long as the wife calls me for supper

I use FireFox with the noscript extension, so I can easily enable js for any site I choose, and make it temporary or full-set, very very easily - and I know which scripts are running on a page, which ones are hosted by the site I visit and which are ported from other sites, etc. etc. etc. It is very easy in this day and age to have js enabled for shopping while disabled for the adservers at the ecommerce site, etc. etc. etc.

I do not have stats behind me, but I have a very strong opinion here: Frankly, I do not believe that the problem you mention truly exists. Oh yes, I believe there may be people who would not shop because of js, but I think that very few shops might be affected by it, and that those people are few, so that their total impact is basically nil. I disbelieve your figures, and would have to see some very solid proof before I would accept them. Where is the evidence?

[Guest]

Very good points, hook

@delicious, my own perspective: I surf the web with js disabled; call me outdated, I really don't care what you call me as long as the wife calls me for supper

I use FireFox with the noscript extension, so I can easily enable js for any site I choose, and make it temporary or full-set, very very easily - and I know which scripts are running on a page, which ones are hosted by the site I visit and which are ported from other sites, etc. etc. etc. It is very easy in this day and age to have js enabled for shopping while disabled for the adservers at the ecommerce site, etc. etc. etc.

I do not have stats behind me, but I have a very strong opinion here: Frankly, I do not believe that the problem you mention truly exists. Oh yes, I believe there may be people who would not shop because of js, but I think that very few shops might be affected by it, and that those people are few, so that their total impact is basically nil. I disbelieve your figures, and would have to see some very solid proof before I would accept them. Where is the evidence?

I do see what you mean about this. Obviously having evidence is hard to verify! Maybe I am bering overly pedantic and I know stats are unreliable, but I do worry about stuff like this.

I have thought about this. I suppose users who know how to turn JS off will know the problems this incurs. The majority of users do not know how to turn off JS. It is just in large comapanies I have seen JS turned off. But this was 3 years agao when i worked for big companies!

I think the rise of 'AJAX', that great buzzword has helped a little in making people trust JS more, and realising that it is not the bad thing it once was.

And yes Hook, you are right about having other info clearly visible.

I think you may have put my mind at ease a little over this issue.

Interesting though.

[Guest]

This thread is a little out of date, but I found myself wondering the same thing about CC4. Everyone can defend JavaScript as much as they want, but it's widely considered by industry leaders that JavaScript should be an ENHANCEMENT of your experience, rather than a requirement for it. This is one of the principles of graceful degradation - you may not provide the same experience for all users, but you strive to provide a good, or functional one, for all.

As we move ahead, the accessibility issue is not necessarily about alternate browsers in a standard computing environment, but about accessing site (including commerce sites) from a wide variety of devices. How sure do you want to be that Mr. Joe Customer has JavaScript enabled on his mPhone? (It's a theoretical example, don't look for mPhones now) Keep in mind, too, that the type of customer who might access your site on some newfangled device which may not have everything in place is likely to be an affluent potential customer.

Now are you still sure you'd defend inline JavaScript? I like using JavaScript to enhance a site, but I ALWAYS consider what would happen if the user, for whatever reason, didn't have JS. I consider the same for CSS. They're both small small minorities, but that on the web that could still be a respectable audience. And if a site's primary function doesn't work, I would call that a problem.

[Guest]

You guys have a very enthusiastic topic going on here.

I believe there is a solution to this, but I am not sure how to accomplish it. I always wondered if there was a way of delivering XHTML/Section 508 through the <noscript></noscript> tags, and if JS was enabled, the site would not be affected.

JS is very modern nowadays and even the major websites use them- from WalMart to Kmart to Bestbuy.

Most people have JS script on and probably 8/9 of them don't even know what it is. I wouldn't worry or panic over it, and like Robsta said, they maybe weren't interested in spending their money.

As per W3C, only 6% of the world don't use JavaScript, and that too has dropped from 12% over the years. The declining factor proves that more and more people have begun to use JS.

AJ Rao