> -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 11:35 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Ajax and CFCs > > On Tuesday 16 August 2005 15:56, Calvin Ward wrote: > > I'm not entirely sure why WDDX isn't being talked about more in regards > to > > AJAX... > > Because it's slow (client side) and heavy (libraries, and produced WDDX > strings).
It's no slower than any other XML standard. The currently available code however - well damn, buddy - that's 6 years old! There's the standard JS parser available which is optimized for Netscape 3 and an "experimental" one optimized for the new IE 4.0 browser. The standard isn't at fault for the speed problems, I think, it's the code that supports it. But even with that old code WDDX on the client is pretty damn peppy on any modern browser/machine just due to improvements in the environment. The standard is verbose... but that's less a problem now than ever before as well. Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:4:215250 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=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
