This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Per the request for this article, I'm posting here some wording changes I want to make. If I don't get any constructive feedback, I'll go live with them in a few days. -- 71.131.70.115 17:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
XHTML (or HTML) and CSS, for marking up and styling information.
The iPhone, Apple, and Flickr examples feel like marketing. Aren't there better places for examples than this? If this is a good place, are these the best examples? Quadnine 17:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The Web development community, first collaborating via the Usenet newsgroup "microsoft.public.scripting.remote" and later through blog aggregation, subsequently developed a range of techniques for remote scripting in order to enable consistent results across different browsers.
Ajax applications execute mainly on the user's machine, by manipulating the current page within the browser using document object model methods.
Generally only small requests need to be sent to the server, and relatively short responses are sent back.
This permits more responsive user interfaces due to the use of DHTML techniques.
While the Ajax platform is more restricted than the Java platform, current Ajax applications effectively fill part of the niche first served by Java applets: extending the browser with lightweight mini-applications.
The difference between returning to a previous state of the current, dynamically modified page versus going back to a previous static page might be a subtle one; but users generally expect that clicking the back button in web applications will move their browser to the last page it loaded, and in Ajax applications this might not be the case.
Developers have implemented various solutions to this problem, most of which revolve around creating or using invisible IFRAMEs to invoke changes that do not populate the history used by a browser's back button.aha... kollam..
The citation (#2) does not include a valid URL.
Should there be something in disadvantages that discusses the difficulty of maintaing session keep alives/ timeouts with AJAX?
After reading the article I was going to make this point too. afaik if something happens on the server side, it cannot be transmitted to the client without it being specifically requested by the client. This results in timeouts running constantly on the client side, and I consider it a limitation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zefram144 ( talk • contribs) 17:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the so-called unofficial logo from the article as being out of place. Besides, what technology needs a "logo"? -- John Seward 08:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Here they are FYI
I added a a series of articles to the external links, but they got removed. There are actually very good articles, for both the beginner and the expert. They contain very interesting topics and they should really be here, having more the role of a tutorial than a simple article.
I added a link directly to the references section because I had the impression nobody takes care of the discussion here. The link I sugesst for adding to the references section is http://en.pediax.de - this is a project (to which I contributed), which develops ideas for a user-interface for Wikipedia largely based on AJAX. It further enables visitors to geo-browse Wikipedia articles on a map. I think a link to Pediax would be really interesting for the readers of the "Ajax (programming)" article, since it exhibits Wikipedia with AJAX support. soeren 21:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest this two web site for External links:
That's all Thanks
I've added the following links to the External links section. They're keynote addresses from the Ajax Experience in Fall 2006.
I notice that the Links section has been commented out for a pending review. I am not sure where may I see/contribute to this review, but I would like to point out that the inline references used in the main article (now encapsulated under the References section) should be placed under the same scrutiny as well. -- Pkchan 10:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Should this section just be entirely removed? I buy the samy worm as an example of a worm that happens to use AJAX, but that seems to be all it is - Samy seems more like an exploit of secutrity flaws in MySpace and in browser handling of Javascript that an AJAX specific worm.
Anyone have any information to the contrary? Artw 18:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Previously, I had added a section discussing one of the advantages of Ajax which has helped to make it a popular technology. My contribution may not yet be brilliant prose, and might require citations in a few choice locations or massaging, but I would like to discuss it WP:BRD. Do you feel this bullet point can be refined to meet your expectations, and if so what should I do? Or if not, please tell me why you feel the point is unsalvageable? Thank you. Jesset77 23:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I've merged the article 'Ajax Desktops' in here as it seems unneccessary to keep them separate. I added the external link from that page into here, however I've noticed your note on additions so to carry over the information rather than make a statement as to whether it should be there or not. Cheers. Orchid Righteous 12:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I've passed this article as a good article - nice work! A couple of things, though:
Apart from those, this is a really good article - a great introduction to Ajax. Nice work! --jam es (talk) 13:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Some mention needs to be made of Ajax used on mobile phones. Microbrowser mentions ajax, for example. http://ajax.phpmagazine.net/ajax_mobile/ Mathiastck 21:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008690.html Mathiastck 06:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I feel it would be useful to give some links to specific implementation of AJAX. Specifically ATLAS which is Microsofts implementation of AJAX. Any thoughts?
-- 12.10.219.36 18:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC) Mark
Look
here.
Booles
09:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Probably bets to keep any mentions of specidfic frameworks or libraries out of the main article as it would lead to everyone trying to get their favoured one as the lead example. Artw 17:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi reviewers, when you get time please consider whether the following links would be useful if added to External Links. I may not add them because I maintain one of the sites. I was one of the instructors for the summer course at Univ of Penn and these pages were created for that course. They consist of very simple Ajax code samples (server and client side) and a few book reviews: | Ajax code samples | Ajax book reviews, and they also link to the course Wiki which has other useful, related information. Harborsparrow 08:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I did not submit the comment below. It is unsigned. Harborsparrow 00:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, I'd like to request that you consider adding a link to Klir Analytics as a Web 2.0 network monitoring tool built using AJAX:
An annoying trend that seems to have built a momentum of its own is the belief that Ajax is an acronym for Asynchronous JavaScript and XML. It's not even a shorthand for that. Those technologies are used in Ajax, but it is a misnomer to equate them to Ajax. Jesse James Garrett himself has defined Ajax applications as meeting two criteria:
1) Uses an asynchronous interaction model
2) Utilizes native browser technologies
Ajax is a TERM, not an acronym or even a shorthand - it's more like a classification or categorization of a way of approaching web application implementations. Someone please revise the text on the page to alleviate the confusion, and remove the reference to "Asynchronous JavaScript and XML". It was disturbing to hear many presenters at the 2006 AjaxWorld conference making reference to this pseudo-acronym, as it made me question whether they really knew what they were talking about.
12.162.3.126
01:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
The article should settle on whether it's "Ajax" or "AJAX" and use only that form. My vote's for "Ajax" because it's the original form, and it's very common. - furrykef ( Talk at me) 01:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm about to correct usage in WordPress Codex: Ajax, not AJAX. Viz.:
-- BenTremblay ( talk) 19:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Agree. There are many sources calling it "Ajax" instead of AJAX. -- FatalError ( t| c) 05:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
This is the last sentence in the article and I wonder if this makes sense? Booles 13:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Ay-Jacks or Ah-Jacks? or both?-- sin-man 05:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
You can watch all the Reuters news on your Google homepage. An AJAX based Retuers player is available here -
http://padmanijain.googlepages.com/myexperiments.html
Same player is also available as Google gadget.
I removed the following, added by 87.203.160.112. While s/he may have the germ of an idea here, it does repeat information in the article and is not yet ready for the lead section. S/he also wrecked the References section, so it needed reverting pretty quick.
<removedText>
DHTML + XMLHttpRequest + ServerFiles = Ajax
How the classic Web user experience works: Although someone can use DHTML, to make changes to the content being displayed on the screen, all of the data used to create the content(displayed or not) of a Web page must be contained within the code that was initially sent. If the user interacts with the page and new data is required to respond to what they have done, a new Web page must be sent from the server and loaded in the browser.
How the Ajax Web user experience works: Ajax changes the classic Web experience by allowing the browser to go back to rhe server incrementally to make changes to the content, turning the Web page into a filter that processes data coming from the server. Instead of having to wait as data is sent to the server, the data is sent and received in the background while the visitor continues to work.
</removedText>
-- Nigelj 23:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
This section needs to be edited for encyclopedic tone and grammar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.19.14.35 ( talk) 20:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC).
The articles explains how Ajax can save bandwidth with an example:
With Ajax, the HTML of the page, e.g., a table structure with related TD and TR tags can be produced locally in the browser and not brought down with the first page of the document.
That seems like a poor example. Any data that's to be displayed in a table structure will be downloaded in XML format, which means that data is going to be marked up with some set of tags that organize it into multiple sets (i.e., rows) of related data values (i.e., columns). "TR" and "TD" at least have the benefit of being only two characters each. — Largo Plazo 13:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Is the part about David W. Radcliffe really necessary in this article? I feel it is particularly wrong that the reference points to a zip file. It's a bit unfit for wikipedia, IMHO. // BankingBum 05:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC) $$
To BankingBum: Whilst I agree that my post wasn't strictly about AJAX (Ajax or ajax, depending upon who you ask) in its present form, it was about the (pre-Ajax) development of alternative technologies to full-page reloads. You allowed other references to alternative technologies under the history section, so why not mine? This seems a bit one-sided to me, as I'm not from Microsoft or the USA. Maybe there should be a seperate section refering to (or at least mentioning) alternatives to Ajax, or an umbrella subject covering ALL web user experience enhancements. If not, where in Wikipedia should my post/article be located? 217.68.129.254 13:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The following is a cut and paste from User:Artw's talk page following a session of edits and revertions. -- SGBailey 22:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Start cut & paste
Since you are so keen to not have a disambig at the start of Ajax (programming), I am converting AJAX into a redirect to Ajax not to Ajax (programming). -- SGBailey 06:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
End cut & paste
Also relevant: talk:AJAX. Artw 22:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
If users typing the all caps verison of AJAX by accident really is a problem then we should keep the disambig at the top of the page, though I dislike it as it's messy and and we'd only be doing it to help users who have made what amounts to a typo. It's certainly preferable to redirecting AJAX to the disambig (see the relevant alk page for the reasoning on that).
But, again, I have real trouble beleiving that this is really all that much of a problem or that it happens very often. Artw 20:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Clarifying policy for Artw: Artw, WP:DISAMBIG states ... When a user searches for a particular term, he or she may have something else in mind than what actually appears. In this case, a friendly link to the alternative article is placed at the top. ...
the policy also states ... When there is no risk of confusion, do not disambiguate or add a link to a disambiguation page. (emphasis not in original).
So far, the facts here seem to be as follows:
Based on these facts, it seems quite clear that a disambiguation link at the top of the page is both appropriate and consistent with Wikipedia policy. Whether the "typo" scenario is common or frequent is not really relevant. Unless you wish to clarify or correct any point made here, a fair conclusion seems to be the disambiguation link should remain in the article. Regards. dr.ef.tymac 21:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Theres zero risk of this articles title being a source of confusion. I'm still kind of dubious as to whether AJAX is a potnential source of confusion - I'd have said no, but if others disagree that strongly then it's good enough for me. Artw 23:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
How is a list of some AJAX-enabled sites SPAM? maybe my list was a little long, i've added a shortened version. jez
Is it pronouced [A-JACKS] or [I-ACKS]? Kicken18 10:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
See above. -- JohnAldis 13:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
There are some serious Search Engine Optimization issues that IMO need to be discussed in this article, such as: I think this topic should not be ignored - many AJAX programmers face huge frustrations daily as they butt heads with SEO's - some informed tactics and best practices can eliminate this frustration - both sides need to be communicating more and don't in fact need to be opposed, because AJAX can be part of a search engine optimized site. Feel free to use this article on AJAX, Web 2.0 and SEO for reference. LunaticBeatnik 01:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Are there any examples of the use of Ajax, to see it working online ?. -- HybridBoy 06:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Taken from article:
"The dynamically created page does not register itself with the browser history engine, so triggering the "Back" function of the users' browser might not bring the desired result.
Developers have implemented various solutions to this problem. These solutions can involve using invisible IFRAMEs to invoke changes that populate the history used by a browser's back button. Google Maps, for example, performs searches in an invisible IFRAME and then pulls results back into an element on the visible web page. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) did not include an iframe element in its XHTML 1.1 Recommendation; the Consortium recommends the object element instead."
This implies that it might be possible to use the object element in the same way as using an IFRAME element for populating the browser's history. Is that possible? If so, why does anyone use IFRAME, when object is recommended? Callum85 23:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It would be good to indicate how is Ajax pronounced in the beginning. Example: Ajax(pronounced .....) is a technique in... and so on. If it is possible, it could be with proper transcription symbols. Johny1407 17:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
"see also section should not include articles which are wikilinked in the article body."
84.226.158.62 (
talk)
20:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
there are other ways to make a http request with simple javascript instead of ajax
Actually I don't know where to enter something about the
easy server side request,
but I believe it's useful for many ppl, who don't know Ajax,
but Javascript. Then they don't have to learn a new language without reason.
That's why I want to publish somewhere or set at least a link ;), since I'm not a big content writer and also I'm not used to work with these huge pages like wiki or something else.
Have you any suggestions where without getting trouble ?
( I've set the ip-talk page to my favorites for a while)
cheers Tümmel
89.217.129.36 (
talk)
17:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
HELLOOOO, is this talk dead ?
¿?¿ Tümmel ?¿?
89.217.54.201 (
talk)
23:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
It's easier to push a button and delete something instead of respone an answer, ins't it?
That's why I prefer not to become a wiki member.
good there's shift space now.
Citation Wikipedia: You will become very, very sad.
Tümmel
In Constituent Technologies: "Given [Given that? Because?] XMLHttpRequest can eliminate the need for page refreshes, other technologies become more prominently used and highlighted with this development approach." Which other technologies? Other than what? Does "prominently" mean "frequently"? What does "highlighted" mean in this context? In sum, can this sentence be deleted without loss of information? Brec 16:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The Sample Code in the article does not have any context nor is it explained what the code does. Wikipedia is aimed at the layman and I, who knows nothing about AJAX (and that was why I read the article) have no idea what the Sample Code is trying to get across. And in particular, why that piece of sample code, as opposed to any other AJAX code? What makes it special? -- Daleh T 10:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- The javascript code given as an example downloads a page from the server and replaces the current document contents with it. It fails however to explain this leaving confusion. Also it only replaces the body of the current document meaning the pages it fetches are expected to contain only the body portion of the page. Writing the content directly instead of trough the DOM is faster but less compliant to W3 specs. One more thing would be that by using innerHTML to write the content most current browsers will not run any scripts contained in it.
I propose that this article shows an example of the Ajax syntax. "Abashed the Devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." ( talk) 21:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Do we need links to tutorials? I think they should be removed; they are irrelevant. Instead, there should be links to maybe articles that explain in detail what Ajax is, or its uses, etc. If people want a tutorial, they can use Google. -- FatalError ( t| c) 23:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I guess you're right. I didn't think about it that way. Sorry for pouncing on you like that. And I didn't really look at the website when I called it personal, I realized I was wrong after I posted my comment. -- Fatal Error 04:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please explain to me how this image contributes to the article in any way? Until then I'm removing it because there is no point in having it. -- Fatal Error 22:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Finally, I admire your devotion and how you are invested in this subject, I am not a devotee in nothing but I embrace Wikipedia as a whole. So it is fine with me as you might interpret either, the image, the etymology of the word or anything else. The important thing is that AJAX or Ajax is basically based on "Openness", therefore so many people may effectively apply it to enhance the UIE in their projects. Now,I will not comeback to the page, for one year, time in which mine, yours and others contributions will be consolidated. My first intention was achieved, to point to the fact that the name as other issues about AJAX or Ajax are not set in stone, at least not entirely for the reasons that have been exchanged as yet in this page, but the article is strong and has its own merit as well. Continue the good work. See you in a year or so. Sincerely, "-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día" ( talk)
This section should talk about AJAX testing. Please contribute your views.
Pratheepraj ( talk) 10:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Did anyone hear about "Comet" and can describe what it is? There is a lot of discussion going on in the Comet (programming) article. Thanks for feedback. - 83.254.208.192 ( talk) 16:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, in a recent discussion it was said [4] that this Ajax article does not explain very well the topic. Are there any major problems or things that need to be fixed? - 83.254.208.192 ( talk) 07:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
<script>
tags. But again, this information isn't sourced, so I don't know whether to trust it. I think in this case, it would be best to find sources back from when Ajax was first coined, to get an idea of what it actually means. When I get some time, I'll do some research on the topic. —
Fatal
Error
23:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the "Disadvantages" section because it was plagiarized from here, and Wikipedia's policies require immediate removal of copyrighted content. If someone finds that the information is under a free license, feel free to revert my edit and post here. Otherwise, we're going to have to rewrite it. — Fatal Error 05:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Oh, look at that, it looks like the "Advantages" section was plagiarized from the same website, here. — Fatal Error 05:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Because the article was completely unsourced and full of original research, I have taken it upon myself to rewrite the article. I have removed a lot of the article that was unsourced and I couldn't find sources for. Everything else I rewrote and found sources for. I have attempted to compile a list of major changes I have made and their rationale:
I will now be more agressive in removing original research, and I urge everyone to follow suit. Most of what was in the article was information from blogs, forums, and other unreliable sources. Before adding new content, please make sure you have a reliable, verifiable source. Thank you. — Fatal Error 06:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Boulevardier: I removed several link to lists of benefits and disadvantages of Ajax. This is no more information in these articles that in the present page: the same lists... Please take a look at the articles... Macaldo ( talk) 11:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
I have just discovered the article is now 1/5 its original size! And a lot of "references" has been added that link to the content that was previously in the article. Is it a new policy to move the content of Wikipedia to external websites and link them? Macaldo ( talk) 11:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
sigh... Shall I go through each of the links?
I really don't think I needed to waste my time doing that, but since you can't seem to understand Wikipedia's policies, there they are, all laid out for you. — Fatal Error 18:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Boulevardier: This "uncited source" comes from the Article of J.J. Garrett who has created the name Ajax, to which this article is dedicated. I wonder if you have even read the article. If it conflicts with the other sources, then remove these sources. Macaldo ( talk) 17:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
VBScript is cited as an alternative to JavaScript in Ajax with a reference. I cite this reference: "VBScript also offers the same capabilities for dynamic updates as well — albeit tied to IE only".
This is no one serious webmaster that want to build web pages for IE only (Firefox is used by 45% of net surfers in some countries). Consequently, VBScript is not an alternative to JavaScript. This is just on example of what I do not like in the new article. Each addition should be discussed (and each removal too).
Macaldo (
talk)
10:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Per the request for this article, I'm posting here some wording changes I want to make. If I don't get any constructive feedback, I'll go live with them in a few days. -- 71.131.70.115 17:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
XHTML (or HTML) and CSS, for marking up and styling information.
The iPhone, Apple, and Flickr examples feel like marketing. Aren't there better places for examples than this? If this is a good place, are these the best examples? Quadnine 17:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The Web development community, first collaborating via the Usenet newsgroup "microsoft.public.scripting.remote" and later through blog aggregation, subsequently developed a range of techniques for remote scripting in order to enable consistent results across different browsers.
Ajax applications execute mainly on the user's machine, by manipulating the current page within the browser using document object model methods.
Generally only small requests need to be sent to the server, and relatively short responses are sent back.
This permits more responsive user interfaces due to the use of DHTML techniques.
While the Ajax platform is more restricted than the Java platform, current Ajax applications effectively fill part of the niche first served by Java applets: extending the browser with lightweight mini-applications.
The difference between returning to a previous state of the current, dynamically modified page versus going back to a previous static page might be a subtle one; but users generally expect that clicking the back button in web applications will move their browser to the last page it loaded, and in Ajax applications this might not be the case.
Developers have implemented various solutions to this problem, most of which revolve around creating or using invisible IFRAMEs to invoke changes that do not populate the history used by a browser's back button.aha... kollam..
The citation (#2) does not include a valid URL.
Should there be something in disadvantages that discusses the difficulty of maintaing session keep alives/ timeouts with AJAX?
After reading the article I was going to make this point too. afaik if something happens on the server side, it cannot be transmitted to the client without it being specifically requested by the client. This results in timeouts running constantly on the client side, and I consider it a limitation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zefram144 ( talk • contribs) 17:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the so-called unofficial logo from the article as being out of place. Besides, what technology needs a "logo"? -- John Seward 08:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Here they are FYI
I added a a series of articles to the external links, but they got removed. There are actually very good articles, for both the beginner and the expert. They contain very interesting topics and they should really be here, having more the role of a tutorial than a simple article.
I added a link directly to the references section because I had the impression nobody takes care of the discussion here. The link I sugesst for adding to the references section is http://en.pediax.de - this is a project (to which I contributed), which develops ideas for a user-interface for Wikipedia largely based on AJAX. It further enables visitors to geo-browse Wikipedia articles on a map. I think a link to Pediax would be really interesting for the readers of the "Ajax (programming)" article, since it exhibits Wikipedia with AJAX support. soeren 21:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest this two web site for External links:
That's all Thanks
I've added the following links to the External links section. They're keynote addresses from the Ajax Experience in Fall 2006.
I notice that the Links section has been commented out for a pending review. I am not sure where may I see/contribute to this review, but I would like to point out that the inline references used in the main article (now encapsulated under the References section) should be placed under the same scrutiny as well. -- Pkchan 10:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Should this section just be entirely removed? I buy the samy worm as an example of a worm that happens to use AJAX, but that seems to be all it is - Samy seems more like an exploit of secutrity flaws in MySpace and in browser handling of Javascript that an AJAX specific worm.
Anyone have any information to the contrary? Artw 18:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Previously, I had added a section discussing one of the advantages of Ajax which has helped to make it a popular technology. My contribution may not yet be brilliant prose, and might require citations in a few choice locations or massaging, but I would like to discuss it WP:BRD. Do you feel this bullet point can be refined to meet your expectations, and if so what should I do? Or if not, please tell me why you feel the point is unsalvageable? Thank you. Jesset77 23:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I've merged the article 'Ajax Desktops' in here as it seems unneccessary to keep them separate. I added the external link from that page into here, however I've noticed your note on additions so to carry over the information rather than make a statement as to whether it should be there or not. Cheers. Orchid Righteous 12:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I've passed this article as a good article - nice work! A couple of things, though:
Apart from those, this is a really good article - a great introduction to Ajax. Nice work! --jam es (talk) 13:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Some mention needs to be made of Ajax used on mobile phones. Microbrowser mentions ajax, for example. http://ajax.phpmagazine.net/ajax_mobile/ Mathiastck 21:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008690.html Mathiastck 06:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I feel it would be useful to give some links to specific implementation of AJAX. Specifically ATLAS which is Microsofts implementation of AJAX. Any thoughts?
-- 12.10.219.36 18:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC) Mark
Look
here.
Booles
09:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Probably bets to keep any mentions of specidfic frameworks or libraries out of the main article as it would lead to everyone trying to get their favoured one as the lead example. Artw 17:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi reviewers, when you get time please consider whether the following links would be useful if added to External Links. I may not add them because I maintain one of the sites. I was one of the instructors for the summer course at Univ of Penn and these pages were created for that course. They consist of very simple Ajax code samples (server and client side) and a few book reviews: | Ajax code samples | Ajax book reviews, and they also link to the course Wiki which has other useful, related information. Harborsparrow 08:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I did not submit the comment below. It is unsigned. Harborsparrow 00:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, I'd like to request that you consider adding a link to Klir Analytics as a Web 2.0 network monitoring tool built using AJAX:
An annoying trend that seems to have built a momentum of its own is the belief that Ajax is an acronym for Asynchronous JavaScript and XML. It's not even a shorthand for that. Those technologies are used in Ajax, but it is a misnomer to equate them to Ajax. Jesse James Garrett himself has defined Ajax applications as meeting two criteria:
1) Uses an asynchronous interaction model
2) Utilizes native browser technologies
Ajax is a TERM, not an acronym or even a shorthand - it's more like a classification or categorization of a way of approaching web application implementations. Someone please revise the text on the page to alleviate the confusion, and remove the reference to "Asynchronous JavaScript and XML". It was disturbing to hear many presenters at the 2006 AjaxWorld conference making reference to this pseudo-acronym, as it made me question whether they really knew what they were talking about.
12.162.3.126
01:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
The article should settle on whether it's "Ajax" or "AJAX" and use only that form. My vote's for "Ajax" because it's the original form, and it's very common. - furrykef ( Talk at me) 01:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm about to correct usage in WordPress Codex: Ajax, not AJAX. Viz.:
-- BenTremblay ( talk) 19:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Agree. There are many sources calling it "Ajax" instead of AJAX. -- FatalError ( t| c) 05:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
This is the last sentence in the article and I wonder if this makes sense? Booles 13:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Ay-Jacks or Ah-Jacks? or both?-- sin-man 05:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
You can watch all the Reuters news on your Google homepage. An AJAX based Retuers player is available here -
http://padmanijain.googlepages.com/myexperiments.html
Same player is also available as Google gadget.
I removed the following, added by 87.203.160.112. While s/he may have the germ of an idea here, it does repeat information in the article and is not yet ready for the lead section. S/he also wrecked the References section, so it needed reverting pretty quick.
<removedText>
DHTML + XMLHttpRequest + ServerFiles = Ajax
How the classic Web user experience works: Although someone can use DHTML, to make changes to the content being displayed on the screen, all of the data used to create the content(displayed or not) of a Web page must be contained within the code that was initially sent. If the user interacts with the page and new data is required to respond to what they have done, a new Web page must be sent from the server and loaded in the browser.
How the Ajax Web user experience works: Ajax changes the classic Web experience by allowing the browser to go back to rhe server incrementally to make changes to the content, turning the Web page into a filter that processes data coming from the server. Instead of having to wait as data is sent to the server, the data is sent and received in the background while the visitor continues to work.
</removedText>
-- Nigelj 23:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
This section needs to be edited for encyclopedic tone and grammar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.19.14.35 ( talk) 20:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC).
The articles explains how Ajax can save bandwidth with an example:
With Ajax, the HTML of the page, e.g., a table structure with related TD and TR tags can be produced locally in the browser and not brought down with the first page of the document.
That seems like a poor example. Any data that's to be displayed in a table structure will be downloaded in XML format, which means that data is going to be marked up with some set of tags that organize it into multiple sets (i.e., rows) of related data values (i.e., columns). "TR" and "TD" at least have the benefit of being only two characters each. — Largo Plazo 13:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Is the part about David W. Radcliffe really necessary in this article? I feel it is particularly wrong that the reference points to a zip file. It's a bit unfit for wikipedia, IMHO. // BankingBum 05:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC) $$
To BankingBum: Whilst I agree that my post wasn't strictly about AJAX (Ajax or ajax, depending upon who you ask) in its present form, it was about the (pre-Ajax) development of alternative technologies to full-page reloads. You allowed other references to alternative technologies under the history section, so why not mine? This seems a bit one-sided to me, as I'm not from Microsoft or the USA. Maybe there should be a seperate section refering to (or at least mentioning) alternatives to Ajax, or an umbrella subject covering ALL web user experience enhancements. If not, where in Wikipedia should my post/article be located? 217.68.129.254 13:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The following is a cut and paste from User:Artw's talk page following a session of edits and revertions. -- SGBailey 22:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Start cut & paste
Since you are so keen to not have a disambig at the start of Ajax (programming), I am converting AJAX into a redirect to Ajax not to Ajax (programming). -- SGBailey 06:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
End cut & paste
Also relevant: talk:AJAX. Artw 22:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
If users typing the all caps verison of AJAX by accident really is a problem then we should keep the disambig at the top of the page, though I dislike it as it's messy and and we'd only be doing it to help users who have made what amounts to a typo. It's certainly preferable to redirecting AJAX to the disambig (see the relevant alk page for the reasoning on that).
But, again, I have real trouble beleiving that this is really all that much of a problem or that it happens very often. Artw 20:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Clarifying policy for Artw: Artw, WP:DISAMBIG states ... When a user searches for a particular term, he or she may have something else in mind than what actually appears. In this case, a friendly link to the alternative article is placed at the top. ...
the policy also states ... When there is no risk of confusion, do not disambiguate or add a link to a disambiguation page. (emphasis not in original).
So far, the facts here seem to be as follows:
Based on these facts, it seems quite clear that a disambiguation link at the top of the page is both appropriate and consistent with Wikipedia policy. Whether the "typo" scenario is common or frequent is not really relevant. Unless you wish to clarify or correct any point made here, a fair conclusion seems to be the disambiguation link should remain in the article. Regards. dr.ef.tymac 21:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Theres zero risk of this articles title being a source of confusion. I'm still kind of dubious as to whether AJAX is a potnential source of confusion - I'd have said no, but if others disagree that strongly then it's good enough for me. Artw 23:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
How is a list of some AJAX-enabled sites SPAM? maybe my list was a little long, i've added a shortened version. jez
Is it pronouced [A-JACKS] or [I-ACKS]? Kicken18 10:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
See above. -- JohnAldis 13:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
There are some serious Search Engine Optimization issues that IMO need to be discussed in this article, such as: I think this topic should not be ignored - many AJAX programmers face huge frustrations daily as they butt heads with SEO's - some informed tactics and best practices can eliminate this frustration - both sides need to be communicating more and don't in fact need to be opposed, because AJAX can be part of a search engine optimized site. Feel free to use this article on AJAX, Web 2.0 and SEO for reference. LunaticBeatnik 01:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Are there any examples of the use of Ajax, to see it working online ?. -- HybridBoy 06:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Taken from article:
"The dynamically created page does not register itself with the browser history engine, so triggering the "Back" function of the users' browser might not bring the desired result.
Developers have implemented various solutions to this problem. These solutions can involve using invisible IFRAMEs to invoke changes that populate the history used by a browser's back button. Google Maps, for example, performs searches in an invisible IFRAME and then pulls results back into an element on the visible web page. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) did not include an iframe element in its XHTML 1.1 Recommendation; the Consortium recommends the object element instead."
This implies that it might be possible to use the object element in the same way as using an IFRAME element for populating the browser's history. Is that possible? If so, why does anyone use IFRAME, when object is recommended? Callum85 23:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It would be good to indicate how is Ajax pronounced in the beginning. Example: Ajax(pronounced .....) is a technique in... and so on. If it is possible, it could be with proper transcription symbols. Johny1407 17:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
"see also section should not include articles which are wikilinked in the article body."
84.226.158.62 (
talk)
20:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
there are other ways to make a http request with simple javascript instead of ajax
Actually I don't know where to enter something about the
easy server side request,
but I believe it's useful for many ppl, who don't know Ajax,
but Javascript. Then they don't have to learn a new language without reason.
That's why I want to publish somewhere or set at least a link ;), since I'm not a big content writer and also I'm not used to work with these huge pages like wiki or something else.
Have you any suggestions where without getting trouble ?
( I've set the ip-talk page to my favorites for a while)
cheers Tümmel
89.217.129.36 (
talk)
17:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
HELLOOOO, is this talk dead ?
¿?¿ Tümmel ?¿?
89.217.54.201 (
talk)
23:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
It's easier to push a button and delete something instead of respone an answer, ins't it?
That's why I prefer not to become a wiki member.
good there's shift space now.
Citation Wikipedia: You will become very, very sad.
Tümmel
In Constituent Technologies: "Given [Given that? Because?] XMLHttpRequest can eliminate the need for page refreshes, other technologies become more prominently used and highlighted with this development approach." Which other technologies? Other than what? Does "prominently" mean "frequently"? What does "highlighted" mean in this context? In sum, can this sentence be deleted without loss of information? Brec 16:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
The Sample Code in the article does not have any context nor is it explained what the code does. Wikipedia is aimed at the layman and I, who knows nothing about AJAX (and that was why I read the article) have no idea what the Sample Code is trying to get across. And in particular, why that piece of sample code, as opposed to any other AJAX code? What makes it special? -- Daleh T 10:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- The javascript code given as an example downloads a page from the server and replaces the current document contents with it. It fails however to explain this leaving confusion. Also it only replaces the body of the current document meaning the pages it fetches are expected to contain only the body portion of the page. Writing the content directly instead of trough the DOM is faster but less compliant to W3 specs. One more thing would be that by using innerHTML to write the content most current browsers will not run any scripts contained in it.
I propose that this article shows an example of the Ajax syntax. "Abashed the Devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." ( talk) 21:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Do we need links to tutorials? I think they should be removed; they are irrelevant. Instead, there should be links to maybe articles that explain in detail what Ajax is, or its uses, etc. If people want a tutorial, they can use Google. -- FatalError ( t| c) 23:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I guess you're right. I didn't think about it that way. Sorry for pouncing on you like that. And I didn't really look at the website when I called it personal, I realized I was wrong after I posted my comment. -- Fatal Error 04:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please explain to me how this image contributes to the article in any way? Until then I'm removing it because there is no point in having it. -- Fatal Error 22:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Finally, I admire your devotion and how you are invested in this subject, I am not a devotee in nothing but I embrace Wikipedia as a whole. So it is fine with me as you might interpret either, the image, the etymology of the word or anything else. The important thing is that AJAX or Ajax is basically based on "Openness", therefore so many people may effectively apply it to enhance the UIE in their projects. Now,I will not comeback to the page, for one year, time in which mine, yours and others contributions will be consolidated. My first intention was achieved, to point to the fact that the name as other issues about AJAX or Ajax are not set in stone, at least not entirely for the reasons that have been exchanged as yet in this page, but the article is strong and has its own merit as well. Continue the good work. See you in a year or so. Sincerely, "-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día" ( talk)
This section should talk about AJAX testing. Please contribute your views.
Pratheepraj ( talk) 10:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Did anyone hear about "Comet" and can describe what it is? There is a lot of discussion going on in the Comet (programming) article. Thanks for feedback. - 83.254.208.192 ( talk) 16:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, in a recent discussion it was said [4] that this Ajax article does not explain very well the topic. Are there any major problems or things that need to be fixed? - 83.254.208.192 ( talk) 07:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
<script>
tags. But again, this information isn't sourced, so I don't know whether to trust it. I think in this case, it would be best to find sources back from when Ajax was first coined, to get an idea of what it actually means. When I get some time, I'll do some research on the topic. —
Fatal
Error
23:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the "Disadvantages" section because it was plagiarized from here, and Wikipedia's policies require immediate removal of copyrighted content. If someone finds that the information is under a free license, feel free to revert my edit and post here. Otherwise, we're going to have to rewrite it. — Fatal Error 05:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Oh, look at that, it looks like the "Advantages" section was plagiarized from the same website, here. — Fatal Error 05:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Because the article was completely unsourced and full of original research, I have taken it upon myself to rewrite the article. I have removed a lot of the article that was unsourced and I couldn't find sources for. Everything else I rewrote and found sources for. I have attempted to compile a list of major changes I have made and their rationale:
I will now be more agressive in removing original research, and I urge everyone to follow suit. Most of what was in the article was information from blogs, forums, and other unreliable sources. Before adding new content, please make sure you have a reliable, verifiable source. Thank you. — Fatal Error 06:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Boulevardier: I removed several link to lists of benefits and disadvantages of Ajax. This is no more information in these articles that in the present page: the same lists... Please take a look at the articles... Macaldo ( talk) 11:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
I have just discovered the article is now 1/5 its original size! And a lot of "references" has been added that link to the content that was previously in the article. Is it a new policy to move the content of Wikipedia to external websites and link them? Macaldo ( talk) 11:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
sigh... Shall I go through each of the links?
I really don't think I needed to waste my time doing that, but since you can't seem to understand Wikipedia's policies, there they are, all laid out for you. — Fatal Error 18:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Boulevardier: This "uncited source" comes from the Article of J.J. Garrett who has created the name Ajax, to which this article is dedicated. I wonder if you have even read the article. If it conflicts with the other sources, then remove these sources. Macaldo ( talk) 17:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
VBScript is cited as an alternative to JavaScript in Ajax with a reference. I cite this reference: "VBScript also offers the same capabilities for dynamic updates as well — albeit tied to IE only".
This is no one serious webmaster that want to build web pages for IE only (Firefox is used by 45% of net surfers in some countries). Consequently, VBScript is not an alternative to JavaScript. This is just on example of what I do not like in the new article. Each addition should be discussed (and each removal too).
Macaldo (
talk)
10:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)