![]() When it comes to web application development there has also been a lot of progress in the field of Ajax: Ajax frameworks of all kinds massively gained popularity and flooded the development community. Google Mail, Google Maps or Flickr just serve as examples for the mass of applications that have to attribute their success substantially to Ajax. Since then Ajax has experienced a real hype. However, the term Ajax only exists since Jesse James Garret introduced it in his article in February 2005. The latter is a combination of techniques that have been available since the late 1990s, such as JavaScript, asynchronous requests and XML. ![]() social software like blogs, wikis, etc.), but also stands for more or less innovative techniques as for instance RSS or Ajax. The catch- word Web 2.0, which was originally established by O’Reilly at the first Web 2.0 conference in October 2004, not only describes a new way of perception and usage of the internet (e.g. Introductionįor some years the Internet has been dominated by phrases like Web 2.0 and Ajax. The thesis concludes with a brief analysis of trends that may be relevant to the future development of Ajax 1. In addition, this thesis presents a general approach for the evaluation of arbitrary Ajax frameworks and points out particular issues that should be given special consideration when applying Ajax initially. The evaluation was carried out by implementing a tracking system for public transportation with particular focus on the applicability, productivity and technical limitations of each framework and Ajax in general. This thesis compares three of the most popular Ajax frameworks in order to facilitate the technology selection process Consequently, finding the best framework for a specific project can be difficult and time-consuming. Not only big companies but also small development teams have developed their own Ajax frameworks or libraries. The rapidly growing popularity of Ajax has led to the publication of numerous frameworks in the last years. Analysis of the Productivity of Development. Analysis of the available Documentationħ.4.6. History, Maturity and Outlook Analysisħ.4.5. Developing Company and Community Analysis. Analysis of the Features and general Aspects. Load and Response Times of the Application. Available Documentation and Supportħ.3.10. ![]() Costs of the Framework and Terms of License. History, Maturity, Outlook of the Framework. Implementation of the Sample Application. Available Documentation and Supportħ.2.10. Load and Response Times of the Applicationħ.1.11. ![]() Available Documentation and Supportħ.1.10. Costs of the Framework and Terms of Licenseħ.1.6. History, Maturity, Outlook of the Frameworkħ.1.5. Implementation of the Sample Applicationħ.1.4. Selection Criteria for the Ajax Frameworksħ.1.1. Application specific Requirements for the Ajax FrameworksĦ.2.1. ![]() Detailed Description of the Tracking SystemĦ.1.2. Description of the Sample ApplicationĦ.1.1. Evaluation Procedure and Sample ApplicationĦ.1. Classification according to the Level of AdoptionĦ. Technologies for Rich Internet Applicationsĥ.4.1. The Trend to Rich Internet ApplicationsĢ.1. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |