What is Digg?48 Comments
- dasch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well, this doesn't really sound all that revolutionary, it's been done a long time. So had Ajax, but at least there was a purpose of creating that term - "Ahah" (dear God) is just such a minor change from receiving the data as XML and then changing the document via the DOM. Actually, I believe the latter is more true to the philosophy of seperation of concerns. I don't want to change my server-side code whenever I need to change some XHTML. Using JavaScript is a compromise I'm willing to take, but that's it.
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Lame, I already did this with my virtual wall app (which, addmittedly, was never finished, but the ability to read HTML code over XMLHttpRequest was already implemented before it was abandoned).
- disord3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Acronyms are getting out of freaking control (OOFC). We don't need one for every stupid little thing (ESLT).
- mathie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dugg! I like the name.
Boss: How do you plan to solve our company tech problem?
Worker: Ahah! Ahah!
Boss: Who is the boss here? You're fired!!! - tjogin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1One more thing; the advantage of this particular approach to AJAX is that it works and fits very well to the View layer of the MVC paradigm. It's simply a lightning fast way of implementing AJAX functionality. While it might seem more dirty at first glance, I've found it works very well, and fast. I don't know what "real programmers" (reference to post above) are supposed to do, but in my world the most important thing is to deliver software and preferably to do so fast and efficiently -- this "AHAH" approach makes exactly that possible.
- gizax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
Hi guys, I have developed a Degradable liveSearch in AHAH. Please visit it to : http://www.gizax.it/experiments/AHAH/degradabile/test/liveSearch.html
bye
Daniele
http://www.gizax.it - citizenpain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I really loved their 80's hit "Take on me!"
- noll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@peerk: I hope you're kidding, that was David Hasselhoff.
- peerk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"It is backed by David Hansson, the creator of Ruby on Rails."
It is great to see this guy really turn his life around.
First his acting career peaked with the kick ass Knight Rider TV series. Then it went downhill with Baywatch followed by some bad spin offs.
Now he completely dropped acting and is a coder. A real modern day Renaissance man.
And a great role model for kids. Much better than Jay Z or Puff Doggy(what ever he is calling himself these days). I doubt if those "musicians" can even do simple math. - wtanaka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I initially did this with the google maps integration on this site:
http://treehouse.ofb.net/go
when I didn't know any better, but every so often, setting innerHTML to some big HTML text would cause IE to blow up. - ermau, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1innerHTML? No digg. Barely works half the time and isn't part of the standard. Parse the data yourself and create the html via the dom functions like a real programmer.
- tjogin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is not a replacement of AJAX, it's an approach to it. I dunno about the "David Hansson backs it part", but it's true that Ruby on Rails uses this particular approach to AJAX (I'd wager that David has never even heard of "AHAH").
- astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It'll never fly with a name like *that*.
- smhill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Lame. It is what most folks do with ajax anyway. You use the text returned instead of the xml. No client site processing that way.
Use of ajax needs to be minimal and for appropriate data. Using it to swap out out content or build/display pages it just weak. It prevents people from bookmarking/linking to it, kills accessibility and hides content from users/agents without javascript or who have it off. - jiminoc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0proof that keyword stuffing can make it to the front page of digg
- kinobe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@biaachmonkie:
Amen.
David What'shisname didn't create Ruby did he? I thought it was a Japanese guy who created Ruby. - paulmetzger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0digg for the 'duh'. A lot of ajax applications mostly do this. Instead of DTHML the developer can generate HTML on the server just like they're used to and then stick it in the page without a page refresh. Is it a *good thing*? beats me.
- hotpepper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ahah is haha backwards. Ha ha!
- Philoushka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@MoeB
it's about created better web-apps. Stop with the usability-hating! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Stupid AJAX everything!
It freaking "AJAXIFIED", we get it STOP WITH THE STUPID AJAX CRAP!!! - mathie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Like said, it's a subset of AJAX capabilities. Just making up a new buzzword. But I bet this one won't fly as high as AJAX. And who call it AJAX 2.0? Is it supposed to be an improvement? I don't think so.
- rydawg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Actually, there are a lot of sites with pure html files still out there. An alarming number of them have not been updated in the past five years.
- maskd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What happened to just having good old HTML files?
- ChiliJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It should be called AJAH (Asyncronous Javascript and HTML).
- Launchpad90210, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Who the hell dugg this? Seriously. There are a lot of talentless clowns jumping on whatever LAME acronym some monkeys make to try to give themselves some credibility.
As others have said - the only way this merits attention is if it was an April Fools joke. If it is being seriously proposed, then these idiots should be ejected from the Earth. - CapTech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Anything that assists people or groups in making the content they have posted on line more dynamic content is a benefit to everyone who cruises the Internet.
- standsolid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0XML? i use JSON to do exactly this for my AJAX stuff.
JSON is freaking perfect.
Although This looks hot if they were to integrate it with rails. I don't like it's current Ajax stuff (obstructive javascript code, plus HUGE libraries)
meh. - sidd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is rediculous, plenty of people already use xhtml with ajax.
- mojo.ash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nothing new or even subtle changes. proclaim some long exist technique in his word and giving a dull name, simply lame. I said it becoz seeing this kind of code b4 ajax term invented.
- klokop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0don't like this non-threaded comment thingy.
- whisperstorm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is an idea we at netscape had quite a while back:
http://devedge-temp.mozilla.org/viewsource/2003/inner-browsing/index_en.html - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes, plenty of people use HTML with AJAX. This is just their formal way of promoting it.
However, I don't give a damn who is promoting it, it's not a proper use of the technology. I develop most of my AJAX XML with the idea that someone else could also use the api on their own site. Not to mention cross-site compatability issues.
XML was developed for information delivery, plain and simple. CSS was designed for style. XHTML was designed(is designed) for semantics. Delivering semantics through XmlHTTPRequest kind of breaks the ideology behind CSS.
If you can't fit your XML information into a predefined portion of your site, you have to ask yourself if you should really be using AJAX/AHAH to begin with.
This is a bad idea. - ironcamel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Taaaaaaaake oooonnnnn meeeeee. TAKE ON ME!
- skydive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0This is complete BS.
Is it April already? - tortan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0simpler and faster? links down. haha, how ironic.
- ph3rny, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Same as ajax... no digg
- james.britt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"It is backed by David Hansson, the creator of Ruby on Rails."
WOW!
Seriously: so what? And WTF does "backed" mean, anyway? Is he tossing in a few bucks to fund development? Or is he giving permsission for people to use it? - MoeB, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1stop with this ajax shiat!
- sucresemoule, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0You are really stupid. You dont even know what your are talking about... At least read the article !
- trampish, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0@sucresemoule
GET A JOB! - rulethirty, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0uhmm... this *is* ajax. Like.. exactly. This is f'n retarded.
- pinkfireball, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0couldnt wait till april fools?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0ahah? oh my god.
- BugMeNot2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0AHAH!
- JamesWilson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0no digg. retarded.
- kinderstod, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0I'm so ***** sick of these moronic acronyms I could vomit.
Oh *****, see, see what you ***** made me do, I JUST VOMITED. Thanks, thanks a lot - BladeMelbourne, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0This is SO lame. AJAX is simple - my site does it.
If you dont have JavaScript you see the same content - it just takes a little longer to load. No Digg.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is