Document Object Model | Technology Tales

JavaScript: write it yourself or use a library?

3^rd July 2008

I must admit that I have never been a great fan of JavaScript. For one thing, its need to interact with browser objects places you at the mercy of the purveyors of such pieces of software. Debugging is another fine art that can seem opaque to the uninitiated, since the amount and quality of the logging is determined by an interpreter not provided by the language's overseers. All in all, it seems to present a steep and obstacle-strewn learning curve to newcomers. As it happens, I have always found server side scripting languages like PHP and Perl to be more to my taste, and I have no aversion at all to writing SQL.

In the late 1990's when I was still using free web hosting, JavaScript probably was the best option for my then new online photo gallery. Whatever was the truth, it certainly was the way that I went. While learning Java or Flash might have been useful, I never managed to devote sufficient time to the task, so JavaScript turned out to be the way forward until I got a taste of server side scripting. Moving to paid hosting allowed for that to develop and the JavaScript option took a back seat.

Based on my experience of the browser wars and working with JavaScript throughout their existence, I was more than a little surprised at the buzz surrounding AJAX. Ploughing part of the way through WROX's Beginning AJAX did nothing to sell the technology to me; it came across as a very dry, jargon-blighted read. Nevertheless, I do see the advantages of web applications being as responsive as their desktop equivalents, but AJAX doesn't always guarantee this; as someone who has seen such applications crawling on IE6, I can certainly vouch for this. In fact, I suspect that may be behind the appearance of technologies such as AIR and Silverlight, so JavaScript may get usurped yet again, just like my move to a photo gallery powered on the server side.

Even with these concerns, using JavaScript to add a spot more interactivity is never a bad thing even if it can be overdone, hence the speed problems that I have witnessed. In fact, I have been known to use DOM scripting, but I need to have the use in mind before I can experiment with a technology; I cannot do it the other way around. Nevertheless, I am keen to see what JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and Prototype might have to offer (both have been used in WordPress). Since I have happened on their respective websites, they might make good places to start, and who knows where my curiosity might take me?

CSS Control of Text Wrapping

11^th September 2007

Recently, I spotted a request for a dropdown list like that which you see below. I managed to create it using the CSS, but it only worked for Firefox, so I couldn't suggest it to the requester.

form select, form select option {width: 185px; white-space: normal;}

form select {height: 16px; width: 200px; white-space: normal;}

form {margin: 300px auto 0 auto; width: 300px;}

Here's how it looks in Firefox 2:

Drop down Menu with Wrapped Entry Text

And in IE6:

Same Drop down Menu as Displayed by IE6

And in Opera 9:

Same Drop down Menu as Displayed by Opera 9

It would be nice if the white-space attribute gave the same result in all three but hey ho... As it happens, the W3C are working up other possible ways of controlling text wrapping in (X)HTML elements, but that's for the future, and I'll be expecting it when I see it.

For menus with wrapped entries, using DHTML menus and DOM scripting seems the best course for now. I suppose that you could always make the entries shorter, which is precisely what I tend to do; I am pragmatic like that. Nevertheless, there's never any harm in attempting to push the boundaries. You just have to come away from the cutting edge at the first sign of bleeding...

Of course, if anyone had other ideas, please let me know.

IE6 and JavaScript performance

22^nd June 2007

Having been exposed to an application at work that uses a lot of JavaScript, I fully appreciate what some mean when they discuss IE6's inefficient handling of JavaScript. After seeing a web page taking an age to reload and your CPU taking a hammering because of JavaScript processing, the penny does tend to drop...

Needless to say, this very much impacts the world of AJAX-driven web applications with their heavy dependence on client-side JavaScript. While IE7 does come to the rescue, there remain plenty of IE6 users still out there, and this is reflected in website statistics. This demonstrates a certain level of inertia in the browser market that not only afflicts the uptake of IE7 but also the likes of Mozilla, Opera and Safari. It also means that anyone developing AJAX applications very much needs to continue testing in IE6, especially if the product of their labours is for wider public use.

An example of such an application is Zimbra, an open-source web application for messaging and collaboration, and the people behind it have generously shared the results of their browser performance benchmarking. They did comparisons of IE6 vs. IE7 and Firefox 2 vs. IE7. IE6 easily came out as the worst of these, while Firefox 2 was the best.

The next question to be asked could centre around the type of code that is processed inefficiently by IE6. While I wouldn't be at all surprised if a list emerged, here's one: using Microsoft's proprietary innerHTML object to update the DOM for a web page format. Having a quick trawl on Google, this came up for mention as a cause of memory leaks. It is also a Microsoft innovation that never got taken up by those overseeing web standards, hardly a surprise since a spot of DOM scripting achieves the same end. It may be faster to code than any alternatives, and it does have some support from other browsers, but it does seem to have got a bad name, so it should be avoided if possible. That said, it would be interesting to see a performance comparison between innerHTML and DOM methods in IE6.

Exploring AJAX

7^th June 2007

When I started it, my online photo gallery started out simply as a set of interlinked HTML pages. Over time, I discovered frames (yes, them!) and started to make use of JavaScript to make the slideshows slicker. In those days, I was working off free webspace provided by my ISP and client-side scripting was the only tool that I had for enhancing functionality. Having tired of the vagaries of client-side scripting while the browser wars were in full swing and incompatibilities reigned supreme, I went with paid hosting to get access to tools like Perl and PHP for server-side processing. Because their flexibility compared to JavaScript was a breath of fresh air to me, I am still a fan of the server-side approach.

The journey that I have just described is one that I now know was followed by many website builders around the same time. Nevertheless, I have still held on to JavaScript for some things, particularly for updating the DOM as part of making the pages more responsive to user interaction. In the last few years, a hybrid approach has been gaining currency: AJAX. This offers the ability to modify parts of a page without needing to reload the whole thing, generating a considerable amount of interest among web application developers.

The world of AJAX is evidently a complex one, though the underlying principle can be explained in simple terms. The essential idea is that you use JavaScript to call a server-side script, PHP is as good an example as any, that returns either text or XML that can be used to update part of a web page in situ without the need to reload it as per the traditional way of working. It has opened up so many possibilities from the interface design point of view that AJAX became a hot topic that still receives much attention today. One bugbear is efficiency because I have seen an AJAX application lock up a PC with a little help from IE6. There will always remain times when server-side processing is the best route, even if that needs to be balanced against the client-side approach.

Like its forbear DHTML, AJAX is really a development approach using a number of different technologies in combination. The DHTML elements such as (X)HTML, CSS, DOM and JavaScript are very much part of the AJAX world but server-side elements such as HTTP, PHP, MySQL and XML are also very much part of the fabric of the landscape. In fact, while AJAX can use plain text as the transfer format, XML is the one implied by the AJAX acronym and XSLT is used to transform XML into HTML. However, AJAX is not limited to the aforementioned technologies; for instance, I cannot see why Perl cannot play a role in place of PHP and ASP, both of which can be used for the same things.

Even in these standards-compliant days, browser support for AJAX remains diverse, to say the least, and it is akin to having MSIE in one corner and the rest in the other. Mind you, Microsoft did introduce the tools in the first place only for them to use ActiveX, while Mozilla created a new object type rather than continue this method of operation. Given that ActiveX is a Windows-only technology, I can see why Mozilla did what they did, and it is a sensible decision. In fact, IE7 appears to have picked up the Mozilla way of doing things.

Even with the apparent convergence, there will continue to be a need for the AJAX JavaScript libraries that are currently out there. Incidentally, Adobe has included one called Spry with Dreamweaver CS3. Nevertheless, I still like to find out how things work at the basic level and feel somewhat obstructed when I cannot do this. I remember perusing Wrox’s Professional AJAX and found the constant references to the associated function library rather grating; the writing style didn’t help either.

My taking a more granular approach has got me reading SAMS Teach Yourself AJAX in 10 Minutes as a means for getting my foot in the door. As with their Teach Yourself … in 24 Hours series, the title is a little misleading since there are 22 lessons of 10 minutes in duration (the 24 Hours moniker refers to there being 24 lessons, each of one hour in length). Anything composed of 10-minute lessons, even 22 of them, is never going to be comprehensive but, as a means for getting started, I have to say that the approach seems effective based on this volume. It has certainly whetted my appetite for giving AJAX a go, and it’ll be interesting to see how things progress from here.