Letractively / dotnetkicks

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/dotnetkicks
1 stars 0 forks source link

Update AJAX proxy #28

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
We are currently using a combination of Dojo, custom JavaScript and aspx
pages to provide AJAX services. We should replace this with one of AJAX
librarys for .NET.

My preference is for Ajax.NET Professional:

http://www.codeplex.com/AjaxPro

Original issue reported on code.google.com by gavinjo...@gmail.com on 17 Jul 2007 at 9:26

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
my preference is jquery ;)

but that's just me.

Original comment by kfricov...@gmail.com on 17 Jul 2007 at 6:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
jQuery looks very nice. We still need to improve the server side ajax services, 
they
currently are aspx pages.

We could use ajax.net to provide json services and jQuery on the client.

Original comment by gavinjo...@gmail.com on 17 Jul 2007 at 7:21

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I use jquery for ajax as well; so not only client side. I often have jquery ajax
calls speak to a custom HttpHandler (ashx) which returns the json objects or 
consumes
the posted data. 

Let me know if you need some jquery help - scribesonic blog engine is using 
jquery
(when I freakin release it...mid august).

I'd be down with implementing some jquery stuff for ya but we'd need to talk.

Original comment by kfricov...@gmail.com on 18 Jul 2007 at 2:08

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Why not stick with Microsoft AJAX.NET? Seems like since this is mostly a .NET 
site,
sticking with the Microsoft libraries might give more exposure to the Microsoft
communities like http://www.asp.net/community/ 

You can also check out Anthem.NET. I've used that open source AJAX library back 
when
the original developer was on the team.

Original comment by james.e....@gmail.com on 5 Sep 2007 at 6:26

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I have no particular affinity with microsoft and want to use the best tool for 
the
job. If two tools are equal in functionality and one is open source, I'll go 
with the
open source one.

I have had some brief experience with AJAX.NET and have found it to be a heavy
library.  Having used rails for the past year, I tend to seek out simple 
toolsets
these days.

Original comment by gavinjo...@gmail.com on 5 Sep 2007 at 7:37

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I'm adding Ajax.NET pro as the server side AJAX/JSON proxy.

Original comment by gavinjo...@gmail.com on 14 Sep 2007 at 6:54

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
After looking at Jayrock, I have decided to go with that. I'm removing all 
Ajax.NET
pro references

Original comment by gavinjo...@gmail.com on 21 Sep 2007 at 10:50

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Any chance we'll see a blog from you detailing the comparisons? I've only used
Anthem.NET (a few years ago) and now I only use MS AJAX.NET and 
AjaxControlToolkit. 

The guys from Gaia widgets post on every forum, newsgroup, AJAX related 
blog/post,
and outlet preaching their framework, but I'd like to see a good comparison of 
the
other ones :)

Original comment by james.e....@gmail.com on 21 Sep 2007 at 11:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I may blog about this sometime, I'm a little busy at the moment on another 
project of
mine.

I have replaced the dojo javascript proxy/services with Jayrock ones. Lots of 
code
has been removed :)

Original comment by gavinjo...@gmail.com on 24 Sep 2007 at 8:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Jayrock is fine for what we need to do at the moment, but I'd switch to a more
complete framework when it comes to UI enhancements, which we may need soon ;)
I have experience with ASP.NET Ajax from Microsoft, scriptaculous and YUI and I 
think
MS implementation is the one which best combines with ASP.NET. Plus,
AjaxControlToolkit comes with no additional price along with ASP.NET Ajax and it
contains lots of cool stuff. It all depends if we want to run light (jQuery or 
others
generic javascript libraries) or we want higher integration with ASP.NET, which 
comes
at a little higher cost in terms of weight. Actually, I've never used jQuery 
btw.

Original comment by simone.b...@gmail.com on 24 Sep 2007 at 11:28