FRIHOST • FORUMS • SEARCH • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


AJAX web coding





thnn
Does anyone have any experience coding AJAX. If so where did you learn to code it.

I would perfer not to have to buy a book.

So, I am therefore wanting online tutorials.

Thanks
Marston
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJAX
I wouldn't advise deploying it on your website though, it's not very accessable (spelling?).
n0obie4life
Marston wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJAX
I wouldn't advise deploying it on your website though, it's not very accessable (spelling?).


AJAX uses Javascript. So, maybe you have to do a scan if Javasciprt is enabled yet.
silentpark
ajax don't need to use java script...

but yes maybe check if you disabled it... (or other thinks referrers for example (maybe some site block unknown refferres..))

and of course ajax isn't a single language its combination of diffrent script languages (and more) to give a confortable and fast userinterface (with dynamic content of course)
and its a good way for you load only what the user wants..

i think you won't come arround buying some books (well ok you can search for ebooks aswell) but tutorials won't do it well for you.
i thik something printed is realy useful switching between programm interface and tutarial text will make you maniac...^^

so maybe start with reading the wikipedia article but i am sure you will need books or hardcopies Smile
polarBear
Quote:
ajax don't need to use java script...
AJAX IS javascript:
Asynchronous JavaScript And XML
. It΄s a bundle of javascript objects arranged in a way you can retrieve information without actually reloading the html. Check out the XmlHttpRequest() object, which is the milestone of AJAX. Also, check out for 'dom manipulation', which is the way you handle the output of XmlHttpRequest for the user to see it.
JayBee
with most horible browser MSIE you must do something like this
xmlHttpRequestObject = (window.ActiveXObject) ? new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") : new XMLHttpRequest();

to get the object

but i thing you don't want know this Smile
root
AJAX is awesome...

Gmail uses AJAX
Slammer
I have a LOT of experience in AJAX related things. I found it really hard at the start to learn it, as at that time there werent any good tutorials on it. If any at all, or there was but they werent as complete as i wanted.

The best thing i can suggest is to just google about it. Cos there are so many different technologies taht come into it. Just trying and pick up what you can from multiple sources. And it should soon fall into place. It did for me.
Ranfaroth
XMLHttpRequest (and all things linked) must only be used on "private" pages : intranet, admin pages, and not on "public" pages, due to the accessibility and non-standard problems.
To fix them, we have to wait to the implementation of the DOM 3 module load & save in browsers...

Read this page for more help.
misomichael
Ranfaroth wrote:
XMLHttpRequest (and all things linked) must only be used on "private" pages : intranet, admin pages, and not on "public" pages, due to the accessibility and non-standard problems.
To fix them, we have to wait to the implementation of the DOM 3 module load & save in browsers...


That's like saying don't use CSS because of inconsistent support across browsers. XMLHttpRequest is quite usable, but just like with any web development, a programmer needs to be aware of all the peculiarities of various browsers in order to make it work correctly for the greatest number of people.
Ranfaroth
misomichael wrote:
That's like saying don't use CSS because of inconsistent support across browsers.
No , for 2 raisons :
CSS are a web standard
A web site is usable without CSS.
Kaneda
Ranfaroth wrote:
misomichael wrote:
That's like saying don't use CSS because of inconsistent support across browsers.
No , for 2 raisons :
CSS are a web standard
A web site is usable without CSS.


1. I'm in favor of the W3C and web standards more than most people (read: W3C evangelist), but there's no denying that W3C are not always the fastest entity on the planet. "AJAX" (still, I hate that acronym) in terms of XMLHttpRequest is a de facto (also hate that word, actually) standard - it's supported in 99.9% of all browsers in use (IE, Firefox/Mozilla/Netscape, Safari/Konqueror, Opera...). Thus, as has happened before, the W3C is now working on catching up, and the W3C Web APIs Working Group is currently working on documenting XMLHttpRequest and making a replacement with guaranteed backwards compatibility:

W3C Web APIs Working Group wrote:
A following deliverable may produce a more powerful HTTP library, with the goal that it is able to be used as a basis for implementing the first deliverable (ie. any new library should be able to be used to implement XMLHttpRequest


Other than XMLHttpRequest, all parts of what has now come to be the meaning of the word "AJAX" are web standards - from the DOM to CSS. While XMLHttpRequest, with the buzzword status of "AJAX" isn't even a necessary part of the equation anymore - just a nicer, cleaner way of implementing what was already doable - although hack-like - with existing "web standards" (IFRAMEs + DOM).

2. A large percentage of well-written "AJAX" web-apps work in browsers with Javascript off (see for example GMail). The majority of those that don't, relied on Javascript for their functionality already, whether AJAX-ified or not (and Javascript IS a web standard). The best use of Ajax, like any Javascript, is for adding behaviour to enhance the user experience on an already working page. And most webdevs realize that.

Moreso than webdevs using CSS, actually... Since most people still use CSS just to get effects they can't get otherwise, while still using non-semantic HTML tag soup, the outcome is, that a website may be usable without CSS in theory, but not necessarily in practice.

EDIT: Oh, just to add... I'm all for replacing XmlHttpRequest completely with DOM level 3 Load/Save as soon as possible (that would be, as soon as the Gecko-based browsers support it). Prefer clean code to what MS (once again) have imposed on us. But not going to say "can't do that" just because the W3C didn't have Load/Save finalized when people wanted it (and yes, the Web API Working Group decision surprises me).
misomichael
Ranfaroth wrote:
CSS are a web standard
A web site is usable without CSS.


Both of these were answered very well in Kaneda's post, but I'll just add: when some variant of XMLHttpRequest is available in every major browser and in many of the minor ones as well, and works very similarly across the board, I'd say that's closer to qualifying as a "standard" than a set of official guidelines that are implemented in highly incompatible and inconsistent ways across all the major and minor browsers. Official standards are great and they're a necessary way of keeping the internet developing toward something that promises equitable access and support across all browsers and platforms, but a developer must also work in the real world and not some ideal that will never fully happen. Sure, I welcome the addition of DOM Level 3 Load/Save support, but the market already wants that functionality in place now, and we have a way of accomplishing it. The market doesn't wait, so at this point it's up to the committee to catch up to what is already being done rather than the other way around.
Ranfaroth
Kaneda wrote:
but there's no denying that W3C are not always the fastest entity on the planet.
DOM Load&Save is being implemented in Opera...
Quote:
XMLHttpRequest is a de facto (also hate that word, actually) standard - it's supported in 99.9% of all browsers in use (IE, Firefox/Mozilla/Netscape, Safari/Konqueror, Opera...).
You missed one point : it's implemented in very various way between browsers. You must use specific and proprietary code to make it work in browsers. For example, for IE, you'll have to use an ActiveX... This isn't a "de facto standard". (If it was, all the compatibility librairies which add some DOM support for old browsers like IE which don't support all of them are in the same case : add specific proprietary code to make the same thing in one browser than in another)
Quote:
Other than XMLHttpRequest, all parts of what has now come to be the meaning of the word "AJAX" are web standards - from the DOM to CSS.
I only talked about XMLHttpRequest (and the javascript functions to use it)
Quote:
2. A large percentage of well-written "AJAX" web-apps work in browsers with Javascript off (see for example GMail). The majority of those that don't, relied on Javascript for their functionality already, whether AJAX-ified or not (and Javascript IS a web standard). The best use of Ajax, like any Javascript, is for adding behaviour to enhance the user experience on an already working page. And most webdevs realize that.
The same recommandations I gave for XMLHttpRequest can be given for Javascript. I also recommand the use of Javascript in an accessibility maner (in a way that doesn't block users without javascript).
Quote:
But not going to say "can't do that" just because the W3C didn't have Load/Save finalized when people wanted it (and yes, the Web API Working Group decision surprises me).
I didn't said that Wink


misomichael, I've answered you above.
Kaneda
Ranfaroth wrote:
Kaneda wrote:
but there's no denying that W3C are not always the fastest entity on the planet.
DOM Load&Save is being implemented in Opera...


Yep, and I'm sure it will be implemented in other browsers too. Doesn't change the state of how things are now Wink And what I meant is, work on the three DOM levels was started in 1997, and Load/Save didn't become a recommendation until late 2004 Smile Things tend to run slow when you're a big consortium.

Quote:
This isn't a "de facto standard". (If it was, all the compatibility librairies which add some DOM support for old browsers like IE which don't support all of them are in the same case : add specific proprietary code to make the same thing in one browser than in another)


Far from the same issue. The scripting needed to support XmlHttpRequest in all modern browsers is only needed because of slight differences in implementation, not because of lack of support entirely. In that way, it's no different from hacks to get around CSS rendering flaws in various browsers.

The only real difference between CSS and XMLHR in this area is that W3C recommended one, and Microsoft came up with the other. And while I'd prefer that every browser manufacturer only implement W3C recommendations, and do it fast, that's simply not going to happen. And with that in mind, whether the standard comes from the W3C or Microsoft shouldn't matter - as long as the support is there in all browsers. Which it is, at least as much as is the case with support for CSS or XHTML. It's a lot of flawed implementations, but they're there (and a complete cross-browser implementation takes about 15 lines of reusable code).

Quote:
I only talked about XMLHttpRequest (and the javascript functions to use it)


Yeah, sorry Smile

Quote:
The same recommandations I gave for XMLHttpRequest can be given for Javascript. I also recommand the use of Javascript in an accessibility maner (in a way that doesn't block users without javascript).


As far as I can see, you recommended steering clear of XMLHttpRequest outside intranets and the like, not using it in an accessible manner Wink

Quote:
Quote:
But not going to say "can't do that" [snip...]

I didn't said that Wink

Then what did you say? Smile As far as I can tell, this:

Quote:
XMLHttpRequest (and all things linked) must only be used on "private" pages : intranet, admin pages, and not on "public" pages, due to the accessibility and non-standard problems.


Which says to me, "tell your clients 'no' if they're asking for XmlHttpRequest usage (they'd probably ask for the functionality, not the technology, of course Wink) on a public site. And what I said is, "not going to do that". Because there's absolutely no reason to avoid XmlHttpRequest, if it's right for the job, and you know how to do it properly. (Or did you mean the last part of the quote? Smile)
Ranfaroth
Kaneda wrote:
In that way, it's no different from hacks to get around CSS rendering flaws in various browsers.
The difference is that when a browser doesn't support some CSS spec, it's the browser's fault
Quote:
Then what did you say? Smile
As you noticed, the important part is the last sentence of my post. Wink
I should have developed more.
pll
Can someone show me a website made with AJAX ?
Stubru Freak
pll wrote:
Can someone show me a website made with AJAX ?


GMail
MrBaseball34
Listen, they OP asked for tutorials on AJAX not an ARGUMENT on what it includes, If you want to argue about it, take it to another thread.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=ajax+tutorials&btnG=Google+Search
MrBaseball34
pll wrote:
Can someone show me a website made with AJAX ?

http://www.morfik.com

includes an AJAX application builder that you can download. This is really revolutionary, BTW.
Ranfaroth
MrBaseball34 wrote:
Listen, they OP asked for tutorials on AJAX
No.
They ask for experiences.
MrBaseball34
Ranfaroth wrote:
MrBaseball34 wrote:
Listen, they OP asked for tutorials on AJAX
No.
They ask for experiences.


Quote:

So, I am therefore wanting online tutorials.



They did too! What they DIDN'T ask for was arguments!
Ranfaroth
Please, read the first post
Quote:
Does anyone have any experience coding AJAX.
Related topics
(official) IE 7 Topic
can you beat MY battle fish??
What softwares are good for biulding a webpage?
WYSIWYG mode
Heya
hosting requirement abuse
OR for empty posts?
What's the best online EZ interface for building a web site?
Greetings from Bulgaria :)
Layout gap problems with Javascript/PHP Combo
Layout Gap PRoblems with PHP/Javascript Combo
Fair Price of (web)coding to charge?
Best place for wap users!
Help with web coding?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Scripting -> Others

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.