Topic awaiting preservation: dhtml - a dying technology (Page 1 of 1)

is dhtml is dying...

DHTML developers are shifting to one of the two routes
1. XML based XHTML and CSS rich websites
2. Flash based websites

Developing cross browser DHTML websites are time consuming and in the end costly to maintain.
Plain websites with compliant coding (XHTML and CSS) without script seems the easy way out
The harder way is to learn Actionscript and integrate it with backend technologies in Flash MX which has a lot to offer. Most of the bottlenecks of old Flash have been removed with this new version, some of them are
a. better accessibility features
b. better backend integration
c. Built in UI components designed after thought
d. Search engines have now started indexing text inside flash

Is DHTML dying?

Ranjan
Visit me

You're confusing DHTML with sites based fully on it. DHTML will always be around to enhance the static documents created by other standards.

Arrr, yeah dude, DHTML is basically a combination of XHTML, CSS and Javascript.

Besides, everything in that Flash pro list you have there, um, plain old HTML has been doing all of that and more for years.

I'm curious though, where'd you get the idea that DHTML developers were either dropping Javascript (yeah right) or moving to flash?... If your getting that from some web zine then I suggest you find a new one cause that author doesn't have a clue.

That sounded like an ad to me. And as for search engines indexing text within Flash... it sounds unlikely, but if you'd like to suggest some Google search terms that'll link to a Flash page (not via some tricky robots.html dodge), then I'll eat my words.

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

Perfect Thunder - I wouldn't call it easy, and for that reason certainly not widely adopted yet, but search-flash apears to be the read deal.

Want some ketchup with those words?

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

There was a thread a while back about DHTML and flash....

Why is it always DHTML and Flash. Their soooo different is makes absolutly no sence to compare the two. Flash has its uses but it's not a standard no matter how mcuh macromedia gloat about their market penetration.

Widely supported W3C standards are the staple (HTML for the most coverage, XHTML CSS & Javascript being the next leg up, Server Side XML is also being put to good use nowadays.), everything else is an extra. Hell, even flash uses W3C standards like XML and the like.

I have never used flash, so its no ad

My other URL is www.dreamlettes.net

Just wanted opinions to the following

1. Is Flash getting better and can be seen as a viable commercial option (meaning should i start learning)
2. DHTML is on the decline, This statement is my personal accessment not read from any web magazine, The reason - At one time every body was creating cool dhtml effects, today those effects are gone... eg www.dhtmlnirvana.com

Ranjan
Visit me

hmm well if you're going that route please tell me when DHTML took off ;(

I think what you are reffering to is the use of DHTML for multimedia type applications, such as Doc's front door or Bugimus's site. You're right in many situations Flash may be a better tool for the job, however try making a simple rollover script with flash, it's not hard but would be a pain in the ass if you just want to change a button. Heck poping up a new window, changing style sheets on the fly all 10 time easier with DHTML.

It's not going to be as flashy as flash but it's still makes day to day type chores a heck of a lot easier.

DHTML is not dying, it's just finding it's place.



.:[ Never resist a perfect moment ]:.

[This message has been edited by bitdamaged (edited 02-20-2003).]

Now, watch me be unpopular and impractical but-

-=I hate Flash on the web. I don't think it belongs there. It has always been my impression that Flash doesn't belong on the web- ACSII standards do... Graphics are *extras*, as is sound... and Flash. If Flash was an open standard, then I might think about it, but as it stands... WYSIWYG editors- *especially* ones without open standards- can only serve to steer web design the wrong way.

-=I *DO* think Flash has a cherished place in the 'Presentation' Department- the place currently occupied by (ugh) Powerpoint... it's wonderfull for such applications.... and ONLY such applications..

-=I would support a ~new~ protocol for flash.... just not web...


Code - CGI - links - DHTML - Javascript - Perl - programming - Magic - http://www.twistedport.com
ICQ: 67751342

I am not quite getting what i want.....

I am hearing opinions but really no reasons for those opinions.

Has anybody here tried flash to lets say make a store/commerce GUI with backend serverside ASP/PHP

If one has, how easier or tougher is it to build, maintain and run such a website and why compared to DHTML.

Ranjan
Visit me

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

Neither DHTML nor flash are required for such a site. It would work fine with straight XHTML generated by server-side code.

DHTML and Flash both are meant to *enhance* a site. If, for some insane reason, you *have* to create a web site that doesn't load a new page when a transaction is made with the server, then DHTML and Flash are both approximately equivalent options - IE and Mozilla support XML-HTTP type objects to communicate with the server, and the percentage of people using IE and Mozilla is greater than or equal to the percentage of people with Flash installed.

Flash isn't evil. It's great for some things. Especially little interactive bits and pieces within a page. However, it's incredibly, extremely rare that either Flash or DHTML will be *necessary* for a web site to function. They're both optional extras, and you should use whichever one suits your purposes better.

They can both be handled well or poorly. I don't know specifics about Flash MX, but supposedly it can be accessable if you use it well. From personal experience, I can say the same about DHTML - it's accessable if you write your code well.

As for your 4 bullet points in your original post:

a. better accessibility features
- I mentioned this already; Flash has decent accessabliity features, XHTML has better ones, in all honesty. When using DHTML, it can be difficult to take advantage of them. I'd say it's about 50-50 on this depending on how well you know what you're doing.
b. better backend integration
- You might be right about that. JavaScript does have the XMLHTTP objects, but otherwise normal requests will have to be sent to the server. Nothing wrong with that, of course; it's worked fine for years.
c. Built in UI components designed after thought
- Unless they're 100% (and i mean 100%) based off of the Operating System's GUI, it's a compromise. There's no reason to give users a flash-based drop down or a flash-based scrollbar when you can just as easily give them one they're used to using all the time in their operating system.
d. Search engines have now started indexing text inside flash
- Search engines have always indexed text within well-coded HTML/XHTML pages.

So, there are advantages and disadvantages either way. DHTML is hardly dying. If it comes down to Flash versus XHTML/XML, I'd argue for the latter any day. Between Flash and well-coded DHTML, well, there's an argument to be made either way. Personally, though, I'd still go with the DHTML.

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

I don't see dhtml dying anytime soon. If anything, I'd see the opposite happening.

What probably will happen is that the huge dhtml apps that are too hard to update might dissappear. Lots of sites give away scripts that consist of heaps upon heaps of code, often containing legacy code (for ns4 etc, also based on document.all etc.) and I'm (or was) as guilty as anyone in that department Since most common browsers nowadays support roughly the same standards, code can turn out way shorter, faster, cleaner, and thus better. I don't even use browserchecks anymore.

"already" ie5+ and mozilla/ns6+ have excellent native stuff to support xml. So, where you would use to build a menuscript the old fashioned way, you can now code a "module" that just needs to be fed an xml file containing the menu content (which in turn is toooo easy to create server side). Recently I built a tree-menu this way. The same xml file could be fed to another menuscript module, resulting in a completely different menu, with the same content. (aah the beauty of xml)

Something to keep in mind is that dhtml, just like flash, is merely a TOOL. the way you use it can be either good or bad, but the tool itself is neither. Flash is (almost) perfect to use for large corporate websites with content that is subject to changes if you want to. The fact that the majority of flash sites is crap does not change this fact. The same goes for dhtml. A lot of it is pretty bad, and you wouldn't wanna use it on really dynamic corporate sites. But when built well, all these techniques are fine.

If I'd have to through in some bullets:

- Standards actually Encourage the use of dhtml
- Xml separates content from layout and makes dhtml and flash easier to embed in dynamic sites
- The problem with flash is that designers mostly can't code, and coding in flash is extremely powerful if done right.
- The problem with dhtml is that coders mostly can't design, whereas css makes the layout so flexible if done right.



peterned

I don't see it dying anytime soon either. It is fast, efficient, and does some things better than anything else out there. And just wait because I've been working on a few new "flashy" type effects using it.

quote:

---

I'll bite your tongue,
Meaning I hate such a way to ask for help, Steve did a lot of excellent Flash work,
and could teach you a lot if you just cared to be polite and "listen".

---

I want to bite your tongue for the above statements. The reasons are

1. I did not ask for help, I asked for opinions from fellow colleagues
2. I don't need anybody to teach me, because I have a fair understanding of Internet technologies and can handle any learning process by myself
3. Your statements make me feel you think you are Mr. KNOWITALL

I had come here with the view that somebody would have experimented with the technology and provide healthy discussions to the pros and cons of building applications with these 2 technologies. Besides providing cursory information that can be found by google searches, no one has provided a clear insite on which a healthy debate can be made.

Probably you haven't visited my website and you think you speak to a novice.

Good luck with your forum for I never intend to visit it again as a lot of people have an ATTITUDE here


Ranjan
Visit me

Say what?

"Freedom of speech is by no means freedom to insult others" from the Razorart goodbye letter.

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

InI: well... I share your opinion ( except about his/her site which looks clean but only reflects some DW skills)
How can someone with a "fair understanding of Internet technologies" tells/asks that DHTML is dying ?
According to ranjan, you're a guy with an "attitude", I guess he hasn't read my posts

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

[This message has been edited by poi (edited 02-23-2003).]

Excuse the off-topic but I wanted to say...

WOW Another French ! Hehe I am not alone ! That's nice

Silence is another speech. -Me