Talk:Ajax Framework

Don't agree with the premise of this article

I'm acquaintances with a fair few front-end web developers, and I rarely ever hear them talk about "AJAX frameworks" (first of all, because "AJAX" is usually "Ajax") - instead they talk about "JavaScript frameworks". Which makes a ton more sense, since the stuff which you most need to hide away behind a framework isn't usually the XMLHttpRequest object but all the other cross-browser crud. I suggest we quickly move this page to "JavaScript framework", and also not include any library-specific code, which should probably be on the pages for the relevant libraries: Dojo (framework), jQuery, Prototype (framework), script.aculo.us, MooTools, Yahoo! UI Library, Rico (framework) etc. --Tom Morris 17:48, 10 August 2008 (CDT)

<a href='http://www.google.com/trends?q=Ajax+framework%2C+javascript+library%2C+javascript+framework&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0'> The google no lie</a>. Just as many people are using the term 'Ajax Framework' as 'JavaScript Library', although 'Javascript Library' is gaining popularity. But of course a Javascript Library does not connote the same thing as "Ajax Framework". A Javascript library may be any grouping of Javascript Functions, for any small purpose. The term 'Javascript Framework' does connote the same thing as the first two classes of Ajax Frameworks that I have described, however it is not nearly as widely used.[Refer to the Google link] However, it doesn't not adequately describe the set of "frameworks" that create Ajax web pages through server-based coding. The most prominent of these is Asp.net AJAX. Asp.net AJAX, and PHP based things like SAJAX are "Ajax Frameworks", but not "Javascript Frameworks". The most proper term for this article would be "Cross-Browser Rich Internet Application Framework" however NO ONE would ever search for that. Yes there is some ambiguity here, but the existence of the term Ajax Framework is not one of those ambibuities.

--[[User:Michael Bonanno|Michael Bonanno] 12:48, 15 August 2008 (CDT)

might as well list them ALL

article would benefit from an updated something like the one found here: http://www.infoq.com/news/ajaxian-surveyPat Palmer 14:03, 16 August 2008 (CDT)

DOM/CSS Manipulation Methods

I'm not sure who put these in, although I can see who removed them. Without knowing the specifics of these events, if they are not appropriate for the main article, would it be reasonable to put them in an article-specific subpage?

Howard C. Berkowitz 00:16, 17 August 2008 (CDT)

These lists of objects, events, etc., impact the reading of the article; they are too long for the format of a main article. There are two ways to reduce their visual impact:

• Put them into multi-column list/table format
• Move them to article-specific subpages. Create these by going to the talk page, clicking on the circled M to get to the Metadata page, edit metadata, and put the subpage names in the designated article-specific subpage fields. Save the metadata. Go to the main article, cut the list, and save. Click on the subpage tab at the top and paste the list into the appropriate subpage, and save.

I'm not sure how well they serve as an example without additional information, but I've never claimed to be an Ajax framework expert. On the other hand, the person who goes to look up the Ajax framework article is probably doing so because he or she is not an Ajax framework expert.

Howard C. Berkowitz 14:17, 17 August 2008 (CDT)