Re: do not say AJAX

ivan wrote:

> AJAX is a stupid and confusing word. People is wondering for
> something that programmers have used for many years.

True.

> Javascript + Xml and asynchronous requests is not new.

I beg your pardon?

> People started to speak about AJAX a lot after XmlHttpRequest was
> introduced,

True.

> so AJAX cant'be Javasript+xml+xmlhttprequest.

I am afraid your logic escapes me.

> But if you still think so, you can't anyway call this AJAX. What is new
> with xmlhttprequest is the possibility to perform a synchronous request!

You probably meant "What is new with xmlhttprequest is the possibility to
perform an asynchronous request!". (Potentially) synchronous requests have
always been possible through AOM/DOM objects and through normal HTML forms.

> (but incredibly AJAX stay for Asynchrous+JavaScript+XML).

Because that is what is "new" about it.

> So AJAX is really a bad word, don't use it here, we are programmers not
> end users to wonder with mythological words.

I agree that it is a term often misused. However,
<URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJAX> exists;
AJAX is not a bad word per se.

PointedEars
Received on Sat Dec 3 04:33:29 2005