Tommybs - 12:56 pm on Dec 8, 2009 (gmt 0)

The problem itself does not lie with jQuery (IMO). It makes it easier for a lot of people to add these effects to their sites and install numerous plugins, but it is up to the developer to ensure that everything works when js is disabled. Graceful degredation. It's mentioned on the jQuery site and in a number of books, jQuery should be used to enhance existing functionality not replace it, the same goes for any javascript. If you're in a controlled environment and know your users then do what you want. The thing is many people use it to change the default behaviour, not enhance it. You should only manipulate what you've created. The whole accessibilty issue is down to developers, not the javscript ( library or not ) that they decide to use. But then again, how many of the so called big players ignore this? Have any of you tried using Facebook without js on?

It all boils down to getting standards for everybody to use. Unfortunately there just isn't a strict enough governing body for the web to enforce this and too many developers just ignore the accessibility issues entirely. You just have to hope that enough people visit sites like this and read these discussions and take them on board.