Usually, objections to this plan [requiring JavaScript] do not equate to predictions that we’re going to screw that up or that it won’t be sufficient; rather, they represent an opinion that requiring Javascript for a web application is an automatic accessibility violation. This might be partly a historical feeling, as some older accessibility standards contained language that said (or could be taken to imply) that in order to be accessible, a site had to work with Javascript turned off. I don’t know what motivated the inclusion of those clauses at the time, but would note that most modern accessibility standards merely say that one’s site must be accessible (regardless of whether or not it uses or requires client-side scripting).