Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #26569 > unrolled thread

<noscript> problem

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  <noscript> problem "Mel Smith" <syntel@cox.net> - 2015-01-13 09:17 -0700
    Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-13 16:58 +0000
      Re: <noscript> problem "Mel Smith" <syntel@cox.net> - 2015-01-13 13:15 -0700
        Re: <noscript> problem "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2015-01-13 22:39 +0200
          Re: <noscript> problem "Mel Smith" <syntel@cox.net> - 2015-01-13 17:48 -0700
            Re: <noscript> problem Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-01-14 09:30 -0200
              Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-14 12:07 +0000
                Re: <noscript> problem Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-01-14 10:50 -0200
                  Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-14 15:53 +0100
    Re: <noscript> problem "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-01-13 18:12 +0100
      Re: <noscript> problem "Mel Smith" <syntel@cox.net> - 2015-01-13 13:19 -0700
    Re: <noscript> problem Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-01-13 15:18 -0200
    Re: <noscript> problem "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2015-01-13 19:30 +0200
      Re: <noscript> problem Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-01-14 15:19 +0100
        Re: <noscript> problem "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2015-01-14 17:13 +0200
    Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-13 18:48 +0100
      Re: <noscript> problem "Mel Smith" <syntel@cox.net> - 2015-01-13 11:58 -0700
      Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-14 14:47 +0000
        Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-15 14:49 +0100
          Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-15 15:31 +0000
            Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-15 17:30 +0100
              Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-15 16:38 +0000
                Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-15 18:31 +0100
                  Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-15 17:35 +0000
                  Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-15 20:00 +0000
                    Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-15 22:19 +0100
                      Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-16 09:23 +0000
                        Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-17 12:23 +0100
                          Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-17 20:09 +0000
                            Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-17 22:54 +0100
                              Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-18 12:16 +0000
                                Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-18 17:26 +0100
                                  Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-18 16:50 +0000
                                  Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-19 10:17 +0000
                                    Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-19 10:40 +0000
          Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-15 19:53 +0000
            Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-15 22:17 +0100
              Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-16 09:59 +0000
                Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-17 13:02 +0100
                  Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-18 16:10 +0000
                    Re: <noscript> problem Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-01-19 15:10 +0100
                      Re: <noscript> problem John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-01-20 10:24 +0000
                        Re: <noscript> problem Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-20 12:09 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#26569 — <noscript> problem

Hi:

    I'm just starting to use the <noscript> tag on a page -- but having 
problems understnding it and getting it to work for me.

Problem:

    If scripting is not available on a browser, I wish to Hide a Button.

    Here is the button:

**************************
<div id="ibuttons">
<input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View 
Statistics" />
<hr />
</div>
**************************

<!-- and here is my failed attempt to 'hide' that button. Doesn't hide it in 
latest version of Firefox-->
<!-- This next set of statements is placed immediately after the above div 
code lines -->

**************************
<noscript>
<div id="ibuttons" style="display:none;">&nbsp;
<hr />
</div>
</noscript>
**************************

    I know I really should not use the same id twice but I did. And I'm 
obviously confused about how to use <noscript> correctly.

Summary Question:

   What is a correct and simple way to hide this button if scripting is 
disallowed in a browser ?

Thank you.

-Mel Smith

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26570

In article <chkuofFkr3cU1@mid.individual.net>, Mel Smith
<syntel@cox.net> wrote:

>Hi:
>
>    I'm just starting to use the <noscript> tag on a page -- but having 
>problems understnding it and getting it to work for me.
>
>Problem:
>
>    If scripting is not available on a browser, I wish to Hide a Button.
>
>    Here is the button:

[snip]

>   What is a correct and simple way to hide this button if scripting is 
>disallowed in a browser ?

Why not start with the button hidden and use scripting - if allowed -
to make it visible.

-- 
"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to
 lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores 
 the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them
 into it in the first place."                             - Douglas Adams

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26577

Tim Streater said:
>
> Why not start with the button hidden and use scripting - if allowed -
> to make it visible.

Hi Tim (et al):

    After reading all the warnings and suggestions from you folks, I did 
what I always seem to do:  Take the easy way out :(    -- which is what Tim 
suggested.

    Here is Tim's method for accomplishing the 'hiding' of this 'buttons' 
division:

*******************
<!-- in my CSS for this division I use: display:none; which hides this
  button division. Then below I conditionally display it --->

<div id="ibuttons">
<input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View 
Statistics" />
<hr />
</div>
<script type="text/javascript">
document.getElementById("ibuttons").style.display="block" ;
</script>
*******************

    But I still have to re-read all the responses to see if I should 're-do' 
this easy way out.

Thanks toTim and y'all

-Mel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26579

2015-01-13, 22:15, Mel Smith wrote:

>      After reading all the warnings and suggestions from you folks, I did
> what I always seem to do:  Take the easy way out :(    -- which is what Tim
> suggested.

I don’t think you took the easy way. It’s unnecessarily complicated, and 
unnecessarily risky.

> <!-- in my CSS for this division I use: display:none; which hides this
>    button division. Then below I conditionally display it --->

You are using both JavaScript and CSS when JavaScript would suffice. 
Even in terms of amount of code, it is more complicated than simply 
using <noscript> (just two tags!) by its spec and about as complicated 
as generating the button dynamically. In terms of technologies used, it 
involves an entirely different technology, CSS. And in terms of 
robustness, it means that when CSS is disabled, the button appears even 
when JavaScript is disabled.

So why would you get prepared for the non-availability of a particular 
technology, JavaScript, in a manner that absolutely requires the 
availability of another technology, CSS?

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26580

Jukka said:

> I don't think you took the easy way. It's unnecessarily complicated, and 
> unnecessarily risky.
>
>> <!-- in my CSS for this division I use: display:none; which hides this
>>    button division. Then below I conditionally display it --->
>
> You are using both JavaScript and CSS when JavaScript would suffice. Even 
> in terms of amount of code, it is more complicated than simply using 
> <noscript> (just two tags!) by its spec and about as complicated as 
> generating the button dynamically. In terms of technologies used, it 
> involves an entirely different technology, CSS. And in terms of 
> robustness, it means that when CSS is disabled, the button appears even 
> when JavaScript is disabled.
>
> So why would you get prepared for the non-availability of a particular 
> technology, JavaScript, in a manner that absolutely requires the 
> availability of another technology, CSS?

Hi Jukka:

    It seems so easy for me.

    I added a line in the style section of my page for div#ibuttons: 
display:none;

    then, made the ibuttons division display in a <script> </script>tag.

    That worked correctly and took only a minute or so.

    Now when actual highly complex page does load and display, the tiny 
addition of those few lines seems to me inconsequential.

What *was* hard was finding out how to *disable scripting* for my current 
version of FF so I could run the <noscript> tests !

 For those who haven't tried it on late versions of FF, here it is:

    In the address bar of FF, one enters:  'about:config',  then, after 
promising to be careful,  go looking for the 'javascript:enabled' setting, 
Then, when you find it, right-click it, then toggle its value to 'false'.

*That* took me nearly an hour of googling before I happened on a post that 
mentioned about the new way that FF is hiding the disabling of scripting

Thanks for the response.

-Mel

-Mel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26581

On 13/01/2015 22:48, Mel Smith wrote:

[snip]

> What *was* hard was finding out how to *disable scripting* for my current 
> version of FF so I could run the <noscript> tests !
> 
>  For those who haven't tried it on late versions of FF, here it is:
> 
>     In the address bar of FF, one enters:  'about:config',  then, after 
> promising to be careful,  go looking for the 'javascript:enabled' setting, 
> Then, when you find it, right-click it, then toggle its value to 'false'.
> 
> *That* took me nearly an hour of googling before I happened on a post that 
> mentioned about the new way that FF is hiding the disabling of scripting

There are other options:
a) install one of these "noscript" addons in FF such as QuickJS;

b) On the Web Developer Tools menu (press Ctrl Shift I on Windows and
Linux, or Cmd Opt i on OS X), click on the "Settings" button, Advanced
settings, Disable JavaScript.

-- 
Joao Rodrigues

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26582

In article <m95jvv$vln$1@speranza.aioe.org>, Joao Rodrigues
<groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> wrote:

>On 13/01/2015 22:48, Mel Smith wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> What *was* hard was finding out how to *disable scripting* for my current 
>> version of FF so I could run the <noscript> tests !
>> 
>>  For those who haven't tried it on late versions of FF, here it is:
>> 
>>     In the address bar of FF, one enters:  'about:config',  then, after 
>> promising to be careful,  go looking for the 'javascript:enabled' setting, 
>> Then, when you find it, right-click it, then toggle its value to 'false'.
>> 
>> *That* took me nearly an hour of googling before I happened on a post that 
>> mentioned about the new way that FF is hiding the disabling of scripting
>
>There are other options:
>a) install one of these "noscript" addons in FF such as QuickJS;
>
>b) On the Web Developer Tools menu (press Ctrl Shift I on Windows and
>Linux, or Cmd Opt i on OS X), click on the "Settings" button, Advanced
>settings, Disable JavaScript.

Latest FF here (35.0). Cmd-Opt-I brings up the web inspector - no
Settings button. There is a Tools -> Web Developer submenu, no Settings
choice there either.

-- 
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English
is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion,
English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious 
and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."            -- James Nicoll, rasfw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26583

Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <m95jvv$vln$1@speranza.aioe.org>, Joao Rodrigues

>> There are other options:
>> a) install one of these "noscript" addons in FF such as QuickJS;
>>
>> b) On the Web Developer Tools menu (press Ctrl Shift I on Windows and
>> Linux, or Cmd Opt i on OS X), click on the "Settings" button, Advanced
>> settings, Disable JavaScript.
> 
> Latest FF here (35.0). Cmd-Opt-I brings up the web inspector - no
> Settings button. There is a Tools -> Web Developer submenu, no Settings
> choice there either.

Sorry, I copied the keyboard shortcuts from the MDN. Maybe there is a
conflict with another addon / extension on your FF for Mac OS.

Ctrl Shift I works as expected for me (FF 35 for Windows and Linux).

-- 
Joao Rodrigues

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26587

Joao Rodrigues wrote:

> Tim Streater wrote:
>> […] Joao Rodrigues [wrote: ]
>>> There are other options:
>>> a) install one of these "noscript" addons in FF such as QuickJS;
>>>
>>> b) On the Web Developer Tools menu (press Ctrl Shift I on Windows and
>>> Linux, or Cmd Opt i on OS X), click on the "Settings" button, Advanced
>>> settings, Disable JavaScript.
>> 
>> Latest FF here (35.0). Cmd-Opt-I brings up the web inspector - no
>> Settings button. There is a Tools -> Web Developer submenu, no Settings
>> choice there either.
> 
> Sorry, I copied the keyboard shortcuts from the MDN. Maybe there is a
> conflict with another addon / extension on your FF for Mac OS.
> 
> Ctrl Shift I works as expected for me (FF 35 for Windows and Linux).

Cmd-Opt/Alt-i works, and the Settings button is the third from the right 
below the top right corner (the gear icon) in Firefox 34.0.5 and 35.0 for 
Mac OS X.  The “Disable JavaScript” checkbox is below “Advanced settings”.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26571

Mel Smith wrote:

>    What is a correct and simple way to hide this button if scripting is 
> disallowed in a browser ?

Just turn the question around: what is a correct and simple way to show
a hidden button if scripting is available in a browser?  That's rather
easy to accomplish:

  <button id="my_button" style="display: none">Label</button>
  <script>
    document.getElementById("my_button").style.display = ""
  </script>

However, it is even better to avoid hidden buttons, that require browser
side scripting to be useful, in the first place (consider CSS being not
available), so the following solution comes to mind:

  <script>
    document.write('<button id="my_button">Label<\/button>');
  </script>

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26578

Christoph said:


> Just turn the question around: what is a correct and simple way to show
> a hidden button if scripting is available in a browser?  That's rather
> easy to accomplish:
>
>  <button id="my_button" style="display: none">Label</button>
>  <script>
>    document.getElementById("my_button").style.display = ""
>  </script>


Christoph and Tim Streater said essentially the same thing.

Thanks Christoph !

-Mel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26572

On 13/01/2015 14:17, Mel Smith wrote:
> Hi:
> 
>     I'm just starting to use the <noscript> tag on a page -- but having 
> problems understnding it and getting it to work for me.
> 

<snip>

> Problem:
> 
>     If scripting is not available on a browser, I wish to Hide a Button.
> 

<snip>

> Summary Question:
> 
>    What is a correct and simple way to hide this button if scripting is 
> disallowed in a browser ?
> 

Here's an advice from the W3C [1]:

"The noscript element is a blunt instrument. Sometimes, scripts might be
enabled, but for some reason the page's script might fail. For this
reason, it's generally better to avoid using noscript, and to instead
design the script to change the page from being a scriptless page to a
scripted page on the fly ..."

[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/scripting-1.html#the-noscript-element>


-- 
Joao Rodrigues

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26573

2015-01-13, 18:17, Mel Smith wrote:

>      I'm just starting to use the <noscript> tag on a page -- but having
> problems understnding it and getting it to work for me.

The official HTML5 specification includes the following advice:
“The noscript element is a blunt instrument. Sometimes, scripts might be 
enabled, but for some reason the page's script might fail. For this 
reason, it's generally better to avoid using noscript, and to instead 
design the script to change the page from being a scriptless page to a 
scripted page on the fly” (followed by an example of that).
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/scripting-1.html#the-noscript-element

>      If scripting is not available on a browser, I wish to Hide a Button.

You could then put that button inside a <noscript> element. This is 
blunt instrument indeed.

> <div id="ibuttons">
> <input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View
> Statistics" />
> <hr />
> </div>

Simply wrap all that inside <noscript>:

<noscript>
<div id="ibuttons">
<input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View
Statistics" />
<hr />
</div>
</noscript>

Alternatively, you could have just <div id="ibuttons"></div> (i.e. with 
empty content) and generate the button and associated elements 
dynamically with JavaScript.

> <noscript>
> <div id="ibuttons" style="display:none;">&nbsp;
> <hr />
> </div>
> </noscript>

That would not make sense. When scripting is disabled, you want to 
*exclude* the button. Here you would *include* it (though with a 
presentational suggestion that it should not be presented). This would 
not affect the presence of the button that you have specified earlier.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26585

On 1/13/2015 6:30 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> 2015-01-13, 18:17, Mel Smith wrote:

<snip>

>> <div id="ibuttons">
>> <input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View
>> Statistics" />
>> <hr />
>> </div>
>
> Simply wrap all that inside <noscript>:
>
> <noscript>
> <div id="ibuttons">
> <input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View
> Statistics" />
> <hr />
> </div>
> </noscript>
>
>


If that latter noscript part is used (thus scripting is disabled), the 
part inside the noscript tag will be used, being:

<div id="ibuttons">
<input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View
Statistics" />
<hr />
</div>

So the button will be visible. The OP wanted to *hide* the button if no 
scripting is available.

Also, what are the chances for that onclick="shostats()" to be executed, 
since we just established we are in a noscript situation?

Am I missing something?

Regards,
Erwin Moller

-- 
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without 
evidence."
-- Christopher Hitchens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26588

2015-01-14, 16:19, Erwin Moller wrote:

> On 1/13/2015 6:30 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>> 2015-01-13, 18:17, Mel Smith wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> <div id="ibuttons">
>>> <input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" value="View
>>> Statistics" />
>>> <hr />
>>> </div>
>>
>> Simply wrap all that inside <noscript>:
[...]
> If that latter noscript part is used (thus scripting is disabled), the
> part inside the noscript tag will be used

Oops. Right. Sorry. There was a some circuitry error in my brain, 
hopefully a temporary one.

For a button that is completely JavaScript-driven (as opposite to a 
submit button, which has non-JavaScript action too), the appropriate way 
is to generate the button dynamically. For example:

<div id="ibuttons"></div>
<script>
document.getElementById('ibuttons').innerHTML =
'<input type="button" onclick="shostats()" id="istatsbutt" ' +
'value="View Statistics" /><hr />';
</script>

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26574

Mel Smith wrote:

>     I'm just starting to use the <noscript> tag on a page […]

Don't.

>    What is a correct and simple way to hide this button if scripting is
> disallowed in a browser ?

To generate it with client-side scripting (“progressive enhancement”).  

document.write() has been mentioned, but if you are concerned that this 
slows down rendering (which it does) too much, use document.createElement(), 
document.getElementById() and HTMLElement::appendChild() onload.  (An 
example for that – filling out the results column – can be found in the 
ECMAScript Support Matrix [see sig] if you run the tests.  document.write() 
is only used as fallback there.)

<http://www.w3.org/wiki/Graceful_degradation_versus_progressive_enhancement> 
(I have not reviewed the entire article.)

No space is written before sentence-ending marks in Germanic languages like 
English.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.$

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26575

Hi All:

    I'll read / review all responses, and go to work.

Thank you for the enlightenment.

-Mel 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26586

On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:48:01 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:


  <snip>
>No space is written before sentence-ending marks in Germanic languages like 
>English.

What Thomas means is that there is usually no space, but not always.

  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26592

John Harris wrote:

> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> No space is written before sentence-ending marks in Germanic languages
>> like English.
> 
> What Thomas means is that there is usually no space, but not always.

Name one instance where it is orthographically correct in English to write a 
space before a sentence-ending mark.

And *please* skip the attribution novel.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26593

In article <1822206.RplnyvqCyS@PointedEars.de>, Thomas 'PointedEars'
Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>John Harris wrote:
>
>> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> No space is written before sentence-ending marks in Germanic languages
>>> like English.
>> 
>> What Thomas means is that there is usually no space, but not always.
>
>Name one instance where it is orthographically correct in English to write a 
>space before a sentence-ending mark.
>
>And *please* skip the attribution novel.

Please learn to use a proper attribution. To put "John Harris wrote:"is
entirely inadequate.

-- 
"I love the way that Microsoft follows standards. 
 In much the same manner as fish follow migrating caribou."
                                               - Paul Tomblin, ASR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web