I don't believe there is an equivalent in other languages. In Java, the
closest match might be DWR for the Reverse Ajax approach, or maybe GWT
for the "no Javascript" approach.
I'm not completely sure, but I think nobody took exactly the same
approach yet, because Xaja opens a large number of pr
On Saturday 14 July 2007 15:01:13 David Négrier wrote:
Hi
I just watching your screen cast, it has very good ideas. I wonder does any
other language has same kind of aproach.
Later or sooner this kind of aproach become must in web business.
Regards
Sancar.
> Indeed, Xaja relies on the keepin
Indeed, Xaja relies on the keeping of an open connexion between the server
and the browser.
In fact, it uses, the Comet approach (which is a pain to implement in
Javascript because the IE code and the Firefox code are completely
different).
(more information here:
http://www.thecodingmachine.com/cm
You can't even be guaranteed to GET the client's IP address in their
request, much less assume that it's going to be the same when you want
to push data out to it!!!
So any Xaja-like technology has to rely on keeping the HTTP connection
open, really...
Does seem pretty cool, though probably not s
On 7/13/07, Tijnema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, that's why AJAX is there, you do a check to a server to see if
there's any new data to parse, if so, then you update (and probably
only one or two divs on your site, and not the whole page)
I understand the use of AJAX to only update a subset
On 7/13/07, Nathan Nobbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/13/07, Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This isn't possible since you can't request a connection to the client's
> machine. Only the other way around.
hmm... in that case perhaps the open connection could be employed and
the
On 7/13/07, Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This isn't possible since you can't request a connection to the client's
machine. Only the other way around.
hmm... in that case perhaps the open connection could be employed and
the feature used selectively; only on certain pages for insta
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 14:59 -0400, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
> > On 7/13/07, Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I haven't looked at the code for Xaja and in no way do I want to
> > subtract from its potential, but I'm going to guess that in some way
> it
> > holds the HTTP connection open an
On 7/13/07, Robert Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I haven't looked at the code for Xaja and in no way do I want to
subtract from its potential, but I'm going to guess that in some way it
holds the HTTP connection open and as such is an expensive feature.
Also, I'm not entirely sure, but isn't
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 14:28 -0400, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
> I have imagined being able to connect to a client browser and push changes
> to the client rather than have something sit on the client side and
> periodically wait for updates.
> or only update when the client refreshes the page manually. b
I have imagined being able to connect to a client browser and push changes
to the client rather than have something sit on the client side and
periodically wait for updates.
or only update when the client refreshes the page manually. both of those
antiquated options are ugly. the push technique
Daniel Brown wrote:
>And to you, yes, "colourful" has a U in it. Well, guess what
> it does for us, too! Just not in the "color" part, but rather the
> "ful" part. So there!
D'oh! You got me there :p
Col
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 10:40 -0400, Jason Pruim wrote:
> On Jul 13, 2007, at 10:31 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:
>
>
> >
> >And to you, yes, "colourful" has a U in it. Well, guess what
> > it does for us, too! Just not in the "color" part, but rather the
> > "ful" part. So there!
> >
>
> It'
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 10:31 -0400, Daniel Brown wrote:
> On 7/13/07, Colin Guthrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I reckon it should be pronounced "zah-jah" in English. (the same Z sound
> > as in Xavier)
> >
> > I wouldn't listen to the Americans in San Fran. Americans always
> > pronounce
On Jul 13, 2007, at 10:31 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:
And to you, yes, "colourful" has a U in it. Well, guess what
it does for us, too! Just not in the "color" part, but rather the
"ful" part. So there!
It's all about "U" isn't it? ;)
--
Jason Pruim
Raoset Inc.
Technology Manager
On 7/13/07, Colin Guthrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I reckon it should be pronounced "zah-jah" in English. (the same Z sound
as in Xavier)
I wouldn't listen to the Americans in San Fran. Americans always
pronounce English in a weird and colourful way (and yes, colourful
has a U in i
David Négrier wrote:
> Regarding the way Xaja is pronounced well that's a good
> question.
> Actually, I'm French and my pronunciation is... well... French ;), so I
> won't give you any advice on how to pronounce it.
> However, I will present Xaja in San Francisco at the Ajax Exper
17 matches
Mail list logo
