The interest is not to provide an interface for non _javascript_ users.
The interest is to guarantee that architecture is kept good and that there is still an isolation between part to show content and part to process business. _javascript_ is a browser part and php is server part. Without keeping the "nojavascript" we make a lot of error in writing code that mix both part. I found and fixed a lo of code when i changed new features by adding a "nojavascript" support.
And it's because we have a good isolation that we can make architecture changes at low cost.
I don't think we have to double code. What we must provide with the "nojavascript" support is not that all features works the same way, but that software can also works without, even it it is a degraded mode. So all we have to do is that the software works ALSO without _javascript_ but not works LIKE. If there is less feature and if interactivity with user is less developed, but software don't hang, it's enough. No need to develop twice. Only to develop clean. In most cases, it should be only a "if (_javascript_)" to add.
Also this is a good trip to make re-engineering of software. It's easier to understand code when we see "this part is a browser needed only part".
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Régis Houssin<address@hidden> Date: 2012/3/12 Subject: [Dolibarr-dev] Clickless !!!
To: Discussions sur le developpement de Dolibarr <address@hidden>
hi,
What is the interest of keeping compatibility "without _javascript_"
nowadays, except to give us more work, because you have to double, more
and more codes?