Ajax Toolkit evaluation.
herb at yorku.ca
Fri May 4 13:03:40 UTC 2007
You have probably considered these additional criteria but just in case :
- efficiency of coding process using toolkits - how quickly can standard
tasks/builds get done? Are there usability issues with the toolkits
themselves that could impede their functionality for certain specialized
purposes that are important to our planned development work?
- efficiency of resultant code - I'm speculating here as I have no
programming/computer science background, but perhaps less efficient code
could cause delays on low-bandwidth networks? There was quite a
discrepancy in the Dr Dobbs-reported test Colin referenced recently -
8X larger that that generated by YUI. Could this be an issue for the
development of high-access UI components which might possibly be more
code- and bandwidth-intensive than standard UI structures?
Jonathan Hung wrote:
>We have come up with a shortlist of Ajax toolkits we will consider as
>the technology to develop FLUID components on.
>5. Prototype with Scriptaculous
>Going forward, we will write a simple component to evaluate each
>component. The criteria used in evaluation include:
>- debugging support
>- cross browser support (IE 6 and 7, FF1.5 and FF2+, Safari, Opera)
>- accessibility support (i.e. ARIA)
>- portal (JSR-168) compatibility (i.e. plays nice in a portal)
>- community support and momentum
>- event abstraction
>We'd love to have input from the community regarding the 5 toolkits we
>have selected for consideration.
>Also, if there are other criteria we should consider, please let us know.
More information about the fluid-work