Talk:List of Ajax frameworks

Multiple implementations

Sajax is not just PHP, it also has implementations for python, coldfusion, IO, Ruby, Perl, Lua and ASP. So it is incorrect to simply list it under PHP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.167.88.77 (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Redlink removal

I've removed red-linked articles from large sections; I've left a couple of red-links where there are no other examples. It would be good if we could have articles created for, say, Wt - if this is the only example of a C Ajax framework it's surely notable? Cheers,  This flag once was red  03:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Backbase in wrong list?

Last time I checked, Backbase was a client-side framework? (Ie it doesnt belong in the Java list but in the Javascript list, since to deploy you import the boot.js file?) 203.152.98.118 (talk) 01:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, the Backbase article doesn't really help:

It provides a cross-browser compatibility layer, Ajax client runtime, Ajax widgets, Server-side JSF runtime and development tools. Developers can use XML tags, JavaScript or JavaServer Faces to develop Ajax applications with Backbase. It can be used with any server-side scripting and programming language, such as JSP, Struts, Spring, JSF, .NET or PHP.

I'm reading that as if (a) Backbase is a serverside framework using JSF; or (b) Backbase is a clientside framework that can be used with any serverside framework.

I'll try and dig out some more information about Backbase and make a move if necessary.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 11:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

NPOV and Formatting?

Is is it just me, or does this article seem to have some NPOV and formatting problems? Most notable is that the list of JavaScript frameworks is in a table, while the other frameworks are not listed as such. Also, the "Other frameworks not among the most used include:" section of JavaScript seems like it could be a biased point-of-view: I'm not a professional web developer, but I've heard of at least one of the frameworks in there (Spry), and regardless, I don't see any reason to need to segment the article like that, making those frameworks a bit more invisible. Dylan (talk) 03:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

• I agree. This appears to be a slanted article and needs input from more editors and experts in the field. I suggest someone get the word out about this to the Ajax community so it gets cleaned up. Otherwise it is likely to be proposed for deletion. Sreed888 (talk) 21:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The reference link to the survey by Burton Group which is evidently the only basis for selecting frameworks for inclusion in this list is just some survey monkey pages, has no association with any organization and is unverifiable data. Who is the Burton Group, what were their survey methods, etc? Sreed888 (talk) 21:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• I found the web site for the survey (Ajaxian 12/09 Survey). Evidently it was conducted by Ajaxian magazine by a prior employee of Burton Group but not by Burton Group. Here is what Ajaxian says about the survey: "Thanks to the Ajaxian community for getting in feedback so quickly on the third annual survey. Richard has written up his thoughts on the data, which we have to remember, accounts for a small percentage of developers, and those that visit Ajaxian are probably not the norm." This is an inadequate basis for determining what to include in this list. Sreed888 (talk) 21:40, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Propose for Deletion?

This is an inadequate article that appears to be mostly promotion for editors' pet frameworks. Unless someone knowledgeable in the field gets in here to clean it up I propose we drop it. Jojalozzo (talk) 02:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It was originally created to stop editors adding their pet frameworks to Ajax framework ;-) Since then we've been fire-fighting here instead - typically removing the non-wiki-linked frameworks (like the ones you removed recently). Not sure whether deletion is or isn't the answer - I'm mindful that if it is deleted "Ajax framework" will be targeted again, but also mindful that that's no reason not to delete. Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 09:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Why visitors want to delete each article that is an issue for them? There is a lot of other lists on Wikipedia, this one is as legitimate that any other. Macaldo (talk) 18:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Apart that, where is the discussion about neutrality suggested by the banner on top of the article? Macaldo (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be none, I have removed the tag. Greenman (talk) 10:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Table of JavaScript frameworks

The table of the most used JavaScript frameworks is questionable. It is based on a single source (builtwith.com), which uses only 10.000 sites for the statistics. Other sources (e.g. http://w3techs.com/technologies/overview/javascript_library/all) come to different distributions, e.g. they have MooTools as #2. Futhermore I find the classification of some of the tools as "framework" quite misleading. E.g. SWFObject is "a simple script", according to their own homepage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.24.158.1 (talk) 16:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Nobody joined that discussion, so I changed the table of JavaScript frameworks accordingly. It contains only Ajax libraries now, which I think is more appropriate. 194.24.158.1 (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Ajax frameworks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100703095339/http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionView/Helpers/PrototypeHelper.html to http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionView/Helpers/PrototypeHelper.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Ajax frameworks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130114022216/http://blogs.adobe.com/dreamweaver/2012/08/update-on-adobe-spry-framework-availability.html to http://blogs.adobe.com/dreamweaver/2012/08/update-on-adobe-spry-framework-availability.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC)