W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > September to October 2014

Re: Suggestion: aax - Ajax Without Javascript

From: Peter Gasston <pgasston@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 19:17:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGNZe2XEPPRyr9aEcBogfU9uCDji0OFgkuLJh7JSSGDOrNrJyQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: softwatt <softwatt@gmx.com>
Cc: lee@leegoddard.net, www-talk@w3.org
I suggest you take a look at <core-ajax>, a Polymer-based custom element
which seems to be what you’re describing:

http://www.polymer-project.org/docs/elements/core-elements.html#core-ajax

On 28 September 2014 11:38, softwatt <softwatt@gmx.com> wrote:

> On 09/28/2014 01:31 PM, Lee Goddard wrote:
> >
> > On 28/09/2014 11:26, softwatt wrote:
> >> On 09/28/2014 01:20 PM, Lee Goddard wrote:
> >>> On 28/09/2014 10:48, softwatt wrote:
> >>>> Iframes are extremely limited  in comparison to this. Only a "box" can
> >>>> be updated without any interaction whatsoever with the rest of the
> >>>> document, appending is non existent, and long-polling is not
> >>>> practical.
> >>>>
> >>> A native way to transclude markup to a node in the DOM, seems very much
> >>> in the spirit of the times. I can't say the same for the way you
> >>> specified attributes — seems to repeat the bungle seen in HTTP headers
> —
> >>> and I'm not sure about the need for any other than a URI, but I watch
> >>> with interest to see how this progresses.
> >> Http headers are indeeed a mess. (Though I think one needs atleast
> >> URI+Cookies).
> >>
> >> But Could you explain how this "seems to repeat the bungle seen in HTTP
> >> headers"? Don't you think that the current AJAX is the actual bungle and
> >> that this is a step towards simplicity?
> >>
> > Sorry — the bungle would be the way the attributes were specified as
> > semi-colon-delimited strings, rather than true attributes.
>
> Oh. Sorry for misinterpreting that. I don't really mind making them
> separate.
>
> A general question: Do suggestions posted on a humble mailing list ever
> make it anywhere nowadays? If not, what additional steps would one need
> to take in order to put an idea into practice?
>
>
Received on Sunday, 28 September 2014 18:18:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 20 January 2020 16:08:33 UTC