Re: Perl and ASP.Net

[Foo JH <suppressed>]

Boysenberry Payne wrote:
> One of the draw back that seems to be evident to me as I've looked
> into the client side frameworks is changes in the code are ought
> of your control.  WIth a purely server side solution it would seem
> to give the coder the choice to upgrade when there is time, etc.
> With the 3rd party frameworks they choose when you upgrade.
> For the more stable solutions this is less of a problem.  For the
> newer technologies I've heard a lot of grumbling about having
> to recode every time there is an upgrade... 
My take on the current situation on client-side frameworks 
(AJAX-styled?) is that it's a bit wild. We have scriptaculous, 
prototype, yui, rico and more. Each of them do parts of a framework (eg. 
drag-n-drop, controls), but even the concept of a client-side framework 
is kinda hazy. What constitutes a client-side framework exactly?

So until some organisation big enough comes along to offer a defacto 
implementation that everybody will take reference from, expect changes 
and more changes. This of course is good news for web ui developers - 
more jobs stability for everybody! On the flip side, IE7-8-9 will 
continue to make a nuisance of themselves.

Are you FireFoxed yet?