An Ajax Reality Worth Worrying About

An anonymous reader writes "This article discusses the hype that currently surrounds Ajax and it's shortcomings. Reliable Ajax frameworks are still under construction, and you should worry about navigation history, bookmarkability, feedback, persistence, concurrency, and security. This article will help you avoid the major problems inherent in Ajax development."

Comments

Sessions

[shawngarringer]

One thing I wish more webmasters would use on sites with AJAX and other technologies is sessions. When I hit "Back" in my browser, I want it to actually go back... not crap out and dump me completely out.
I know... I know, I should be using whatever function is built into their website. But, I'm sorry, clicking Back or hitting backspace is just such a habit, its really a deal breaker for me...
I have no idea how much time I've wasted refilling in forms on my bank's website because it cant figure out what I'm doing when I press back!

Ajax is not the problem

[Umbral Blot]

The real problem with Ajax isn't java script or browser fickleness, or Microsofts hatred of standards, it is that we are trying to solve one a problem, distributed applications over the internet, within the wrong framework, a document viewer with scripting capabilities. What we really need is an internet application browser, that is desgined to be able to host such applications, render consistantly over multiple platforms, be stable and secure, ect. Then users wouldn't be confused concerning the behavior of the back button for example, because no one expects applications to have a back. It might make sense to have the broweser be able to launch the application viewer when needed, but more than that is just begging for problems.

Re:Ajax is not the problem

[billcopc]

Yes and no. It's true that asking a web browser to become an application client is a deadly blunder, but the underlying problem is that few sites today serve static content anymore. It's all about logins and forums and customization. Essentially we're going back to the 80's and 90's with BBS'es, where each sysop would painstakingly tweak and customize their server to offer a unique experience. Myself, I ran Maximus and I had pretty much rewritten every function using the MEX scripting language built into the BBS software, though I am known for being a masochistic code poet.

With Ajax, the corporate sites want to use it to extend their online service portfolio. The vanity sites want to use it for the coolness factor. I'm actually surprised it took this long for Ajax to catch on. I was doing funky tricks with Javascript years ago, specifically in 1998 for a spiffy navbar on my personal site, then a newer style in 2003 for thumbnail galleries a-la Flickr streams, browsing pictures quickly without reloading the static HTML template.

It's a fair bit of extra work getting all the browsers to play nice, but it's easier than inventing a standard for thin-client apps that will please everyone.

Re:Ajax is not the problem

[uradu]

You're absolutely right, but unfortunately the browser is the most widely distributed application delivery platform today. XUL might be nice and all, but it is supported on very few desktops. It's actually quite amazing how closely a modern web app can be scripted and styled to behave like a traditional application. As these web applications become more and more sophisticated they are increasingly outgrowing the traditional forms-based web paradigm, and features like the Back button can indeed become quite meaningless or even counter-intuitive. Sort of the like Back button in Windows Explorer, that you somehow instinctivly hit every once in a while but inevitably doesn't do what you want.

Re:...Unless you use a tool that already fixes the

[NickFitz]

Can this be true - you can program in a high-level language like C# for the browser?

Well, you can (with ASP.NET), but it's an awfully long-winded method for generating bloated HTML pages which don't work without JavaScript. Try Front Page, or save a Word doc as HTML; either is a much quicker way of generating shoddy code ;-)

goodbye accessibility

[Eil]

Allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment here...

Let's not also forget accessibility and backward compatibility. Neither of which you have if your site heavily relies on Ajax. Ajax is fun and all, but if you build a site or application that relies on Ajax (as so many do these days), you're completely leaving behind those with disability that prevents them from using a graphical browser and those who can't or won't use the latest versions of IE, Firefox, or Safari. (Let's at least be honest for a moment and admit that those are the only three browsers that Ajax authors ever attempt to target and even throwing Safari in there is a bit of a stretch.)

For awhile there, we were making good progress toward better adherence to web standards. Now it seems like "oooh shiny!" is rapidly taking over web design again.

Of course it's possible to build a site or application that is backwards compatible and accessible and thus uses Ajax only as a enhancement. But if the site works just fine without Ajax, why would you waste time implementing a few extra Ajax features just for show?