Has progressive enhancement lost of the war?

Question

With the widespread adoption of JavaScript dependent SPAs and frameworks, has progressive enhancement lost the war?Is there a place for it today?Edit: For the sake of the argument, let's include tangential ideas like graceful degradation, unobtrusive JavaScript, etc.

brudgers · Accepted Answer

[delayed]

Someone1234 · Answer

No "war" ever started. It was just an idea by a few niche people who wanted to disable 1/3 to 2/3 of their browser's technology then demand that web-site operators/builders spend a lot of time and money on implementing for that sub-1% population. They didn't, and these people had no real leverage.
The biggest argument was accessibility, but it turns out people with extra needs don't want a poorly maintained version of the page with a ton of missing features. So instead additional aria tips were added, website operators encouraged (or required by law) to hit A-AAA, to explain parts of the page, combined with assistive technologies getting much better.
The other big argument was in essence "Build first for IE11, then add Firefox/WebKit features on top." Which naturally went away when IE died and evergreen browsers took over.

breckenedge · Answer

Yes, it&rsquo;s dead. UJS still has a place, but it looks like Alpine or HTMX.

Has progressive enhancement lost of the war?

With the widespread adoption of JavaScript dependent SPAs and frameworks, has progressive enhancement lost the war?
Is there a place for it today?
Edit: For the sake of the argument, let's include tangential ideas like graceful degradation, unobtrusive JavaScript, etc.

[delayed]

Yes, it’s dead. UJS still has a place, but it looks like Alpine or HTMX.