> Forgive me if I'm missing something here but isn't
> this a bit of a step backwards?
I don't know if I'd say backwards... I'm hoping the advent of
standards-compliant browsers and the evolution of the standards will
help make DOM more generally accepted if never required. I'm of the
impression they're generally accepted by the average visitor / user
now... There are a handful of exceptions - people with severe security
"issues" or who refuse to accept any page that can't be easily viewed
via a telnet session (which most users wouldn't even begin to know
_how_ to use much less why). Though honestly with the market
saturation of computers / internet technology only steadily
increasing, these folks are in a minority that will only continue to
shrink.
> Correct me if I'm wrong but the whole Flash based
> RIA thing was supposed to address the difficulty
> with producing the kind of applications you can
> produce with AJAX - as Micha pointed out - these
> kind of applications require domscript gurus and
> are not for the faint hearted.
I don't use Ajax but I have a lot of dom gui widgets I use -- I mostly
don't write DOM these days... I do on occasion, but mostly I just use
my CF-wrapper API's ... of course, you could say that these also
require you to become a guru of another kind... which would have some
validity, but then there are lots of ways in which the complexity of
the underlying API can be (and are) encapsulated into higher-level
constructs, like xml... for example:
<div>
<div>
<tap:event name="onclick">
<tap:toggleElement target="otherdiv" />
<tap:event>
</div>
<div id="otherdiv" />
</div>
Which is much more intuitive to read than the domscript this generates
(this is paraphrased):
<script language="javascript">//<![CDATA[
randomdiv_onclick() {
document.getElementById("otherdiv").style.display =
(document.getElementById("otherdiv").style.display=='none')?
'block' : 'none';
}
//]]></script>
<div>
<div id="randomdiv" onclick="randomdiv_onclick();" />
<div id="otherdiv" />
</div>
> I would I imagine due to cross browser issues.
> Flash has a few advantages such as a
> consistent look and feel across platforms,
The disadvantages of html/dom in this regard aren't nearly the issue
you might expect -- not anymore anyway -- haven't been for a few
years.
> and mobile support (and yes I'm aware of the
> disadvantages) - I'm confused why the sudden
> uptake as a result of Google' recent applications.
> As others have pointed out this is nothing new.
Because it's Google and any time Google does anything everybody reacts
as though it's the most amazing discovery since penicilin -- even
though they really haven't ever done anything genuinely new, just put
new trenchcoats on old ideas.
> I guess Macromedia really did shoot themselves in the foot
> with the pricing of Flex - I can' help but wonder the type
> of applications and rapid uptake we would have seen had
> they not priced it so high.
You're certainly not alone in that thinking.
> Just my 2 pence
> (before someone asks for this to be moved to cf-community)
Wouldn't it make more sense to move this to the new Ajax list?
s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework
http://macromedia.breezecentral.com/p49777853/
http://www.sys-con.com/author/?id=4806
http://www.fusiontap.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking
application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a
client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:199188
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
