In theory I should agree with Chris, in practise I agree with Tim ! Indeed there are much more places where JS is used than cart, isn'it ?
On the other hand we should be aware that using JS everywhere and often should not be a best practice to adopt (OK it's already done :( Perhaps using it *only* thru an Ajax Framework maybe a solution in future ? Jacques ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Ruppert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 4:32 PM Subject: Re: json + prototype + ajax? > And btw, the old cart, used JavaScript all the time. Why is this > just coming up now? Why don't we figure out a parallel solution for > other people who want to turn of JavaScript - instead of holding > everyone back? > > My 2cents > > On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:27 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote: > > > Chris, JavaScript is ingrained in just about anything that submits > > forms anymore. I could understand saying something like this about > > Flash - however my mind is changing on that as well - but saying > > that you have to be able to manage something as complicated as the > > feature set that OFBiz employs without JavaScript is almost like > > saying - not everyone is off of Netscape 4.x and we need to set the > > bar _that_ low for our CSS/HTML standardization. > > > > My vote for this is to move forward, not hang back. JavaScript, as > > much as I'm not a huge fan, is a reality in todays world - and the > > use of of DOES NOT make the code bug filled. > > > > Cheers, > > Tim > > -- > > Tim Ruppert > > HotWax Media > > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > > > > o:801.649.6594 > > f:801.649.6594 > > > > > > On Dec 15, 2006, at 8:07 AM, Chris Howe wrote: > > > >> Tim, > >> > >> To your post > >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-510#action_12458496 > >> > >> I would want to see it degrade. The fact that SVN > >> OFBiz does not degrade should not be support to > >> introduce more code that follows a poor pattern. The > >> current state of OFBiz not being able to add to cart > >> when JS is turned off needs to be reported as a bug > >> and fixed. > >> > >> Wanting to see this degrade should especially be true > >> for a functionality of "Anonymous" checkout. This > >> means you're wanting to sell product to random people. > >> So, if you're wanting to sell to random people, you > >> would want to lower the barriers as far as possible > >> for them to use your site. Good web surfing practice > >> is to white list JS for sites that you trust. This is > >> especially true in corporate environments. > >> > >> So to summarize, my two cents would be to report the > >> add to cart bug to JIRA, fix OFBiz's SVN of this > >> pattern and degrade the JS in the anonymous checkout > >> patch. But to quickly see this kind of functionality > >> into OFBiz, I would prefer to see it added to a > >> sandbox so that others could help work out these > >> peculiarities. > >> > >> > >> --- Tim Ruppert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> I would certainly love to see the highly useful > >>> Anonymous Checkout > >>> Process example used in OFBiz - at least until > >>> someone else comes up > >>> with a good reason to remove Dojo and go to a > >>> different front end > >>> framewok. Does anyone have any real objections to > >>> doing this in > >>> light of the fact that no one has another example > >>> _and_ that the > >>> checkout process is unnecessarily tedious? > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Tim > >>> -- > >>> Tim Ruppert > >>> HotWax Media > >>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > >>> > >>> o:801.649.6594 > >>> f:801.649.6594 > >>> > >>> > >>> On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:07 AM, Jacopo Cappellato > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Here are my two cents about this interesting > >>> thread: > >>>> > >>>> 1) the Ajax toolkit's license must be fully > >>> compatible with the > >>>> OFBiz license > >>>> 2) even if it's a good thing to try to find one > >>> official Ajax > >>>> toolkit for OFBiz now and finally get this ball > >>> running, I think we > >>>> should do this but also review the decision (and > >>> the results we'll > >>>> get with the adopted framework) in 2-4 months from > >>> now and possibly > >>>> return on it; I mean that we should keep an > >>> open-minded approach > >>>> and also consider new solutions (or criticism to > >>> the adopted > >>>> toolkit) since I think that in the Ajax world the > >>> effects of the > >>>> 'software darwinism' > >>> (http://www.apache.org/foundation/ > >>>> glossary.html#SoftwareDarwinism) still are not > >>> mature > >>>> > >>>> Jacopo > >>>> > >>>> A. Zeneski wrote: > >>>>> I'll let this thread run a little while longer > >>> before we say to > >>>>> have a > >>>>> full official vote. As of right now, it appears > >>> most people are > >>>>> looking > >>>>> at Dojo, and that is fine with me. > >>>>> It seems that most of these toolkits do the same > >>> thing, so to me its > >>>>> just a matter of making a decision so I can push > >>> forward with my > >>>>> work. > >>>>> As for being more active on the lists, sorry I > >>> have been MIA for so > >>>>> long. I've been involved in a lot of custom (non > >>> open source) work > >>>>> as of > >>>>> late and apologize for not being around. I will > >>> do my best to be > >>>>> here as > >>>>> much as possible. Thanks! > >>>>> Andrew > >>> > >>> > > > >
