«« Next » « Previous
«« Next » « Previous

Link Details

Link 7671 thumbnail
User 209687 avatar

By douglaskarr
via douglaskarr.com
Published: Nov 24 2006 / 23:24

Many of the Ajax examples out on the web utilize XML. A common and simple method for generating dynamic content from another page can utilize Ajax without XML at all. I know that sounds a bit wacky... the X is for XML, right? Well, I suppose. Do we call this Ajai? Asynchronous JavaScript and InnerHTML? The method to pass content without XML is one that's commonly utilized throughout the web but not discussed much. I like it because parsing XML is a pain in the butt.
  • 8
  • 0
  • 1111
  • 249

Comments

Add your comment
User 200670 avatar

coboldinosaur replied ago:

1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

nice hack, but it probably has a lot of security issues.

User 210218 avatar

xmldev replied ago:

-1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

You obviously no little about XML.

User 209687 avatar

Doug Karr replied ago:

1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

xmldev, thanks for your comment but you couldn't be further from the truth. For the last 3 years I've been working closely with a mountain of APIs and both REST/SOAP based APIs. I'm fluent with DOM in JavaScript, PHP, ASP, and ASP.NET. Having spent some time with the 'big boys' at MashupCamp, I can tell you that working with XML is the most common frustration of most companies. For those of us in the fast lane, it comes easy, but for everyone else it's a big pain in the butt.

User 204084 avatar

kenman replied ago:

1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

What kind of security issues would be introduced that aren't inherently present from traditional AJAX implementations? Perhaps I am overlooking something, but the output format shouldn't have any effect on security (especially since both are unencrypted).

User 204084 avatar

kenman replied ago:

-1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

P.S. I'm surprised this article is getting votes, I thought everyone knew how to do this. It's certaintly not ground-breaking, I first used it 3 or 4 years ago, and if anyone took the initiative to check out the javascript API's then they could have discovered that you can substitute "responseText" for "responseXML" at any point in AJAX development.

User 204084 avatar

kenman complained ago:

-1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

kenman reported this link as lame on 11/25/2006 @ 04:07:02

old/lame...

User 192671 avatar

ethzero complained ago:

-1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

ethzero reported this link as lame on 11/25/2006 @ 05:07:54

weak

User 190346 avatar

ilazarte complained ago:

-1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

ilazarte reported this link as lame on 11/25/2006 @ 07:05:32

this type of article just promotes lazy thinking and implementation. developers who are learning would be wise to steer clear of this type of solution since it's inevitably short term.

User 201716 avatar

unchqua replied ago:

1 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

This technique is also called "AHAH" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AHAH).
For the "reported as lame" people: choose your development's shortest mileage. If you see that AHAH will be faster to develop and easier to use, why not just use it? If this HTML code will never change, it may be hard-coded at server side.

User 209687 avatar

Doug Karr replied ago:

0 votes Vote down Vote up Reply

Thanks, unchqua for adding this info!

Add your comment


Html tags not supported. Reply is editable for 5 minutes. Use [code lang="java|ruby|sql|css|xml"][/code] to post code snippets.

Voters For This Link (8)



Voters Against This Link (0)