[Misc] User Profile: The link to see the activity stream of a wiki is no...

[gdelhumeau]

...w generated by javascript, because it can not work without javascript.

The other possibility is to make it work without javascript.

[sdumitriu]

This is going in the wrong direction... The failing test was showing that a feature of XWiki is not accessible enough, and instead of making it accessible, you just hid the feature completely from the validation suite.

[gdelhumeau]

Sergiu: We need to decide if we still want to support the navigation without javascript.

[cjdelisle]

IMO "should work without javascript" is a best practice which carries over from the quaint old days when the internet was html files in /var/www, these days practically nothing works correctly without js, many sites appear as blank pages and from an accessibility standpoint, while we always have to consider how to make our pages accessible, screen readers and such which can't cope with javascript at all would be unusable in today's internet so I don't think accessibility is significant. Personally I'd call a link not showing up graceful degradation.

[sdumitriu]

It's not something old, the WAI is still very active, it produces new accessibility specs and guidelines, and accessibility is not something that's losing traction. The fact that there are hundreds of "modern" JavaScript frameworks that every novice "programmer" likes to use doesn't mean that it's OK to follow the trend. The lower class of so called programmers switched from messy PHP to messy jQuery, and now to one of the many inaccessible frameworks. The serious giants still care about accessibility.

Screen readers do cope with JS applications, if they follow the WAI-ARIA guidelines.

Some accessible web sites are as important as accessible building entrances, should we (society) stop bothering with those, too? If you can't walk up stairs, stay home. If you can't use rich JavaScript applications, stick to phone and paper.