From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) by hurricane.the-brannons.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FA48784A2 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 02:05:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id f8so5679507wiw.1 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 02:04:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:user-agent; bh=Y5nbujyS93uj7n1jb0RoYAhH2M8pDokbLtGvTwZvb8o=; b=kLZltfE23AbfaRrJlZ98tocM5L8LfsE0VjE9W8fhzDG2OpCNYyFduXBJkhPNFFPxF5 e8gv18X/ZJj4Wq5YtMNm+tIFR95QlZu6FOSK6eBSU7wJFuimw1upzDlZmLnLnFEVVxDd WbMY9ajKb0oNDZj6wmWlBnrkEfvUlsZLkD3CdkrGC79YupNgEMoWSzOOmaShWUd0X3hE b7DpIPy7rFycJdIP43RXRBTbWd5wE2rT7IHxV49zZsu7si2bRwKeLw9UVeL0UcnUCqgG AeNFw76iwnsW3R8I90YWLtK1zca+eL4lWYaE8eZzp0isc8Qnug1JJbqFfkmAyz2zQ6vB OWdg== X-Received: by 10.194.84.144 with SMTP id z16mr1010071wjy.23.1392890684553; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 02:04:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from toaster.adamthompson.me.uk (toaster.adamthompson.me.uk. [2001:8b0:1142:9042::2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ga20sm60141332wic.0.2014.02.20.02.04.43 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 02:04:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:04:40 +0000 From: Adam Thompson To: Edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com Message-ID: <20140220100440.GQ28870@toaster.adamthompson.me.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: [Edbrowse-dev] noscript handling X-BeenThere: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Edbrowse Development List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:05:38 -0000 I noticed in a recent post to the commandline group that apparently edbrowse doesn't handle noscript tags. Out of interest, how much work would it be to handle the contents of these tags in cases where js is disabled? As this is one of the ways that web developers are (or at least were) told to handle non-js enabled browsers, it'd be a good idea to use these tags if provided and js is not working (either through failure or because the user switched it off). Cheers, Adam.