| AJAX = Asynchronous JAvascript + Xml
|
Asynchronous JavaScript And XML, or its acronym, Ajax(Pronounced A-JAX), is a Web development technique for creating interactive web applications.
The intent is to make web pages feel more responsive by exchanging
small amounts of data with the server behind the scenes, so that the
entire Web page does not have to be reloaded each time the user makes a
change. This is meant to increase the Web page's interactivity, speed,
and usability.
AJAX allows for more-responsive Web applications by uploading HTML and JavaScript code to the browser to create a lightweight application inside your browser, which then asynchronously exchanges XML data in small chunks with the server using the XMLHttpRequest object. One benefit of all these Web-based services is that they don't care what type of PC OS you're using, be it Windows, Linux, or Mac—as long as your browser is up-to-date.
It is technology for a new wave of browser-based apps that will replace most standard desktop apps.
Another benefit is that they don't require an installation process the way packaged software does. And in this software model, fixes and upgrades can be made at any time, on the server, and without the user needing to do anything.
The Ajax technique uses a combination of:
Like DHTML, LAMP, or SPA, Ajax is not a technology in itself, but a term that refers to the use of a group of technologies together.
|
|
|
|
History
Most histories of Ajax start with Microsoft's initiatives in developing Remote Scripting.
However techniques for the asynchronous loading of content on an
existing web page without requiring a full reload date back as far as
the IFRAME element type (introduced in Internet Explorer 3 in 1996) and
the LAYER element type (introduced in Netscape 4 in 1997, abandoned
during early development of Mozilla). Both element types had a src attribute that could take any external URL, and by loading a page containing javascript that manipulated the parent page, Ajax-like effects could be attained.
Microsoft's Remote Scripting (or MSRS, introduced in 1998) acted as
a more elegant replacement for these techniques, with data being pulled
in by a Java applet
which the client side could communicate with using JavaScript. This
technique worked on both Internet Explorer version 4 and Netscape
Navigator version 4 onwards. Microsoft took first advantage of these
techniques in Outlook Web Access supplied in the Exchange Server 2000
release.
The web development community, first collaborating via the
microsoft.public.scripting.remote newsgroup and later through blog
aggregation, subsequently developed a range of techniques for remote
scripting in order to enable consistent results across different
browsers. Early examples include JSRS library from 2000, the introduction of the Image/Cookie technique in 2000, and the JavaScript on Demand technique in 2002. In 2002, a user-community modification to Microsoft Remote Scripting was made to replace the Java applet with XMLHttpRequest.
Remote Scripting Frameworks such as ARSCIF surfaced in 2003 not long before Microsoft introduced Callbacks in ASP.NET
Since XMLHttpRequest
is now implemented across the majority of browsers in use, alternative
techniques are used infrequently. However, they are still used where
wide compatibility, small implementation, or cross-site access are
required. One alternative, the SVGT protocol, employs a persistent connection for continuous exchange between browser and service.
|
|
Articles
Some early articles promoting Remote Scripting techniques:
Pros, cons and criticism
Pros
Interactivity
Ajax applications are mainly executed on the user's machine, by manipulating the current page within their browser using document object model
methods. Ajax can be used for a multitude of tasks such as updating or
deleting records;expanding web forms; returning simple search queries;
or editing category trees -- all without the requirement to fetch a
full page of HTML each time a change is made. Generally only small
requests are required to be sent to the server, and relatively short
responses are sent back. This permits the development of more
interactive applications featuring more responsive user interfaces due
to the use of DHTML techniques.
|
|
Portability
Ajax applications use well-documented features present in all major
browsers on most existing platforms. Though this situation could
feasibly change in the future, at the moment, Ajax applications are
effectively cross-platform.
While the Ajax platform is more restricted than the Java platform,
current Ajax applications effectively fill part of the one-time niche
of Java applets: extending the browser with lightweight mini-applications.
Cons and criticism
Usability criticisms
One major complaint voiced against the use of Ajax in web
applications is that it might easily break the expected behavior of the
browser's back button. The different expectations between returning to
a page which has been modified dynamically versus the return to a
previous static page might be a subtle one. Users generally expect that
clicking the back button in web applications will undo their last state
change, and in Ajax applications this might not be the case. Developers
have implemented various solutions to this problem, most of which
revolve around creating or using invisible IFRAMEs to invoke changes that populate the history used by a browser's back button. Google Maps,
for example, performs searches in an invisible IFRAME and then pulls
results back into an element on the visible web page; it is possible to
track user behaviour via callbacks which are called whenever the back
button is pressed, restoring the application state that existed at the
time.
A related issue is that dynamic web page updates make it difficult
for a user to bookmark a particular state of the application. Solutions
to this problem exist, many of which use the URL fragment identifier (the portion of a URL after the '#' [1]§4.1 and [2]§3.5)
to keep track of, and allow users to return to, the application in a
given state. This is possible because many browsers allow JavaScript to
update the fragment identifier of the URL dynamically, so that Ajax
applications can maintain it as the user changes the application's state[3]. This solution also improves back-button support.
|
|
Response-time concerns
Network latency — or the interval between user request and server
response — needs to be considered carefully during Ajax development.
Without clear feedback to the user [4], smart preloading of data [5], and proper handling of the XMLHttpRequest object [6] users might experience delay in the interface of the web application, something which users might not expect or understand. [7]
The use of visual feedback to alert the user of background activity
and/or preloading of content and data are often suggested solutions to
these latency issues.
In general the potential impact of latency has not been "solved" by
any of the Public Domain AJAX toolkits and frameworks available today,
such as the effect of latency variance over time... [8].
JavaScript
While no browser plug-in is required for Ajax, it requires users to
have JavaScript enabled in their browsers. This applies to all browsers
that support Ajax except for Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 and below
which additionally require ActiveX
to be enabled, as the XMLHttpRequest object is implemented with ActiveX
in this browser. Internet Explorer 7, however, will implement this
interface as a native JavaScript object and hence does not need ActiveX
to be enabled for Ajax to work.
As with DHTML applications, Ajax applications must be tested
rigorously to deal with the quirks of different browsers and platforms.
A number of programming libraries have become available as Ajax has
matured that can help ease this task. Likewise, techniques have been
developed to assist in designing applications which degrade gracefully and offer alternative functionality for users without JavaScript enabled...
Name issues
There have been some critics of the term Ajax, claiming that Adaptive Path (the consulting firm that coined the term [9]) or other proponents are using it as a marketing vehicle for previously-used techniques [10] [11] [12] [13].
|
|
Accessibility
Using Ajax technologies in web applications provides many challenges for developers interested in adhering to WAI accessibility
guidelines. Developers need to provide fallback options for users on
other platforms or browsers, as most methods of Ajax implementation
rely on features only present in desktop graphical browsers.
Web developers use Ajax in some instances to provide content only to
specific portions of a web page, allowing data manipulation without
incurring the cost of re-rendering the entire page in the web browser.
Non-Ajax users would optimally continue to load and manipulate the
whole page as a fallback, allowing the developers to preserve the
experience of users in non-Ajax environments (including all relevant
accessibility concerns) while giving those with capable browsers a much
more responsive experience.
Browsers that support Ajax
(Note that this is a general list, and support of Ajax applications will depend on the features the browser supports.)
- Microsoft Internet Explorer version 5.0 and above, and browsers based on it (Mac OS versions not supported)
- Gecko-based browsers like Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, SeaMonkey, Camino, Flock, Epiphany, Galeon and Netscape version 7.1 and above
- Browsers implementing the KHTML API version 3.2 and above, including Konqueror version 3.2 and above, and Apple Safari version 1.2 and above
- Opera browsers version 8.0 and above, including Opera Mobile Browser version 8.0 and above
|
|
Browsers that do not support Ajax
This is a list of browsers that definitely do not support Ajax
- Opera 7 and below
- Microsoft Internet Explorer (below version 5.0)
- Text-based browsers like Lynx and Links
- Browsers for the visually impaired (speech-synthesising, braille)
- Browsers made before 1997
See also
|
|
External links
Articles
|
|
Tutorials
|