|
|
Posted by Andy Dingley on 04/11/07 21:38
On 11 Apr, 18:45, shimmer...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 11, 5:34 am, "Andy Dingley" <ding...@codesmiths.com> wrote:
>
> > What's _really_ bad isDUML, <sic>
> > the idea that some client-DOM-tweaking language has any justification
> > for being anywhere near the server.
>
> Can you provide a cogent argument for why you believe this?
It's excessive coupling between the server and the client's DOM. Why
should the server even know what structure the client's DOM looks
like? Are we then to force all clients to implement matching DOMs and
user controls? If the server offers a simple abstract document format
in some minimal format (classic non-3.2 HTML) then at least we've
decoupled this much.
Ideally (and well-architected AJAX is a good step towards it) we move
beyond this to an even less document-centric and more data-centric
transport format. We certainly don't go in DUML's direction, where
intimate details of how the client _implements_ its controls has to be
built into the document (and so also the server).
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|