AJAX is not that big a deal really - it's only doing client side what most of us have been doing on the server for years.
What is anoying is when people bandy it around as if it were a language or some kind of endorsment.
It's only a development paradigm - nothing more - after you've seen a couple come and go, you kind of become immune to the hype surrounding them.
I would have thought it was fairly ubiquitous nowadays anyway (?)
On 10/19/05, Amias Channer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:26:26 +0100
vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> No offence, but I wish people would stop using the "AJAX" acronym, Ajax is a
> dutch football team, the 'new' acronym is just another way of saying "look I
> can use _javascript_" i.e something people have been doing for years </rant>
> (sorry 'AJAX' is one of my pet annoyances) That aside it looks like a good
> app. :-)
And people saying AJAX is just _javascript_ is a pet annoyance of mine too ;-)
The term AJAX (as distinct from the footbal club Ajax) in its original usage
refered not just to using _javascript_ . It's more about the fact the the code fetches the data instead of pulling it from the HTML file.
see http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/archives/000385.php
The _javascript_ actually writes the page based on the XML data it has collected , it can also filter and sort this data (think google maps).
This is not very different from the conventional model where the data comes
as part of the HTML file and updates don't happen without a page refresh.
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJAX
I think this destinction is important although the common misuse of the term
would suggest that others don't . they are of course wrong ;-)
Toodle-pip
Amias
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
--
You can't build a reputation based on what you are going to do.
