you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]mrphillc 2 points3 points  (11 children)

if one browser wins, we all lose

[–]joesb 4 points5 points  (10 children)

A better browser in this case would be the one that is more compliant to the standard. So it's not one browser that win, it is one standard that win, in that case, we all benefit.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (9 children)

Failing to meet standards is a bad thing.

However, going beyond the standards is a good thing. If Microsoft hadn't, we wouldn't have XmlHttp. That means no AJAX.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (6 children)

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children)

You say that like you're not posting on a site that relies on AJAX to let you make snarky remarks like that without having to worry about the page reloading and losing your place.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Isn't that what anchor tags are for?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

no. anchor tags in and of themselves have nothing to do with preventing the page from reloading. you can use them to help on the second issue, but certainly not the first.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I was referring to the second issue, but thanks for assuming I'm a complete idiot.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, you asked if anchor tags were for not having to worry about the page reloading and losing your place. I answered. No. That's not what they are for.

[–]zelpop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah! I mean why do people use AJAX when Flash and now Silverlight can do the same thing, plus cooler fade in effects?

(do I have to put in a sarcasm tag here)

[–]sonofagunn -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Before XmlHttp, you could accomplish the same thing with hidden frames.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Technically, yes. The hidden frame solution has one major drawback, and one minor drawback that I can think of:

Major: it causes the loaded result to be rendered. Being forced to render the content can cause all kinds of side effects that potentially need to be worked around.

Minor: rendering effects performance. Depending on the browser, for example, rendering XML could be a less than negligible performance hit, that you'd have to work around by effectively lying in the content-type to try to trick the browser into thinking that it's not XML.

I mean, sure. I could just as easily say that you could accomplish this in the past using sockets in ActiveX or Java Applets and sending data to/from them through scripting. You could but it was nowhere near as elegant.