|
|
|
|
|
|
by slang800
4173 days ago
|
|
|
I'm just going to reply to a couple points on JS: We write code that runs on the client-side primarily for performance. Rendering without needing to send more data over the network or run more code on our servers is a huge win... Especially when we're not building traditional "web pages", but rather full web-apps - requiring fairly complex UI and business logic. Plus, JS isn't something to be avoided these days. Its become a full-featured language and is as powerful if not more powerful than .NET |
|
|
Sure, it did occur to me that I could program my site so that the user saw only one URL and that URL would keep changing as appropriate for the user's dialog. A few minutes after I noticed that possibility, I gave it up. Sure, with that possibility, maybe the big deal would be write nearly all the 'logic' in JS to run on the client, with a lot of AJAX threads, using the server as a remote database or some such. Okay, if you want to do that. I'm not sure I've seen many such Web sites. Maybe someday I will want the architecture of my site to be like that, but for now I'm staying with tradition.
And for using a lot of JS on the client, I'd be concerned about the ability of a lot of advanced JS to do what I wanted, reliably, on all the mobile to desktop computers in the world; instead I just want to send some simple HTML, a little CSS, and maybe some minimal JS that Microsoft writes for me, which will be okay, I hope.
Okay, good: As long as I'm staying with a traditional Web site architecture, without JS I'm not missing much. Good to know. I'll conclude the same about version n + 1 of CSS.
Gee, I'm learning!