We can’t be sure how comparable this data is with the Yahoo! data. Since 2010 there has been strong growth in the use of smartphones, most of which will receive and run JavaScript, so it’s not unexpected that the numbers have fallen slightly and I would expect that to continue.
We have earlier results from Yahoo!, which suggested that in the UK in 2010, 1.3% of people were disabling JavaScript. This is the first time that we have carried out this analysis at GDS. What's important is understanding how many people this is, and now we know. So while these are interesting reasons, ultimately the reason why someone doesn’t receive the enhancements is largely irrelevant. any undoubtedly many more I haven’t even thought about.network errors, especially on mobile devices.browsers that pre-load pages they incorrectly predict you will visit.page being left between requesting the base image and the script/noscript image.existing JavaScript errors in the browser (ie from browser add-ons, toolbars etc).corporate or local blocking or stripping of JavaScript elements.It’s hard to know exactly why these browsers didn’t run the JavaScript, but a number of possible reasons are: So a significant number of people had a JavaScript enabled browser but still didn’t run the scripts successfully. I *now* know that ‘noscript’ tags will only be followed by browsers that explicitly have JavaScript disabled or don’t support JavaScript at all. Significantly higher than the 1,113 visits requesting the ‘noscript image’. Which meant that 4,329 visits weren’t requesting either the ‘script image’ or ‘noscript image’.
I expected that number of ‘base image’ requests would closely equal the combined ‘script image’ and ‘noscript image’ requests.ĥ09,314 visits requested the ‘base image’.ĥ03,872 visits requested the ‘script image’.ġ,113 visits requested the ‘noscript image’.
Did web slices go away in ie10 code#
We deployed this code and then collected the log data from over half a million visits. an image that only browsers not executing JavaScript would request (the ‘noscript image’).an image that only browsers executing JavaScript would request (the ‘script image’).This code included three images, of which browsers should request two.įirst, an image that virtually all browsers would request (the ‘base image’). We chose this page because of its high volume of traffic and low likelihood of any bias towards a particular user group or demographic. So some code in the GOV.UK homepage (similar to an approach inspired by an experiment Yahoo! Conducted in 2010). Particularly when we’re dealing with relatively small proportions. There was enough variance in the data as a result of local and corporate caching, bots, analytics blockers, timing, latency in the disparate logging etc to worry us about the accuracy of the data coming back. Well, we tried this, but in short, it wasn’t accurate enough. Web server traffic - JavaScript analytics traffic = non-js traffic? Web server logs tell us more, but they won’t tell us whether people are running JavaScript. Unlike other interesting numbers (such as IE6 or mobile device usage) it wasn’t a simple web analytics query - not least because standard analytics packages typically capture usage through the execution of JavaScript. But it’s interesting to know that 1 in 93 people will experience the design without JavaScript enhancement - especially when it comes to prioritising how much of our time to spend on that design. This isn’t about whether we should offer a good service to non-JavaScript people, progressive enhancement, done well, ensures we always will. So what: shouldn’t we support people without JavaScript anyway? Surprisingly, the proportion of people that have explicitly disabled JavaScript or use a browser that doesn't support JavaScript, only makes up a small slice of people that don't run JavaScript. So, 1 user in every 93 has JavaScript disabled? That’s a bad thing for a team that is evangelical about data driven design, so I thought we should find out. We didn’t really have any idea how many people are experiencing UK government web services without the enhancement of JavaScript. "What proportion of people is that?” an inquisitive mind asked. We started discussing the pros and cons of an approach that would provide a significantly different interaction for any people not running JavaScript. A few weeks back, we were chatting about the architecture of the Individual Electoral Registration web service.
0 kommentar(er)
