odds? how many users have js disabled?

HOW many users are likely to have javascript disabled

[albo]

I use javascript/dhtml quite a bit. It makes heavy contribution to the look and feel, and easy maintenance, of my websites. My "graceful degrade" is a link to a site directory. I'd be grateful to hear opinions on (1) the percentage of clients likely to have js disabled and (2) what common "graceful" degrades webmasters use.

[DrDoc]

Whether someone is likely to have JS disabled or not depends entirely on the target audience. Even so, within each target audience there are clicks of people that have JS disabled, and others who don't. Only your own research would be able to determine what the percentage is for your own site.

[Harvs]

I work in an Australian Travel company with most of our users being in Australia and Europe.

According to my Google Analytics statistics we have 97.64% with Java enabled

Hope this helps

-Harvs-

[albo]

I must then decide: client site includes three pages sharing one external js and also sharing three rather long "<ul><li><a href..." sets which the js could writeln out for each of the three pages. Does explicit xhtml coding in each page (with resulting bandwidth but quicker interpretation) outweigh js (smaller bandwidth but more interpretation)? I'll have to decide and experiment.

[Taffa]

According to my Google Analytics statistics we have 97.64% with Java enabled

Java is not same as JavaScript...
Do google search "java vs. javascript" for details.
Google Analytics is useless, it only tracks visitors if they have JavaScript enabled.

[DrDoc]

Ask yourself this:

Will the site still function and be usable even if the JavaScript content isn't visible?
Will the JavaScript content add so highly to the functionality that it can't easily be done away with or accomplished in another way?

If you are able to answer "yes" to at least one of the two questions -- go ahead and use it.

[albo]

Yes, I KNOW the answer to the second question is a firm affirmative, and the first question, in my case, is being rather weakly dealt with, and is part of the reason I started this thread. Right now, all I have on each page is a link to a "site directory". The previously mentioned "<ul><li><a>" group is a navigation <div> with links that prettify by writing status area...lots of bandwidth to put on each and every page explicitly, and lots of maintenance should a page title be added to the nav group.