Browser Warfare around javascript can split web 2.0
If the apocalypse happens, we will all remember its beginning in February 2005, when the Google Maps web mapping service appeared and the term Ajax appeared. After that, interactive web applications of the new generation have become extremely fashionable. It is considered that the combination of JavaScript, DHTML and CSS literally breathed new life into the World Wide Web and brought Web 1.0 to the next stage of its development: Web 2.0 appeared.
Good old JavaScript unexpectedly ranked among the most fashionable and relevant technologies. Moreover, people began to speak with a serious expression, for example, about the profession “JavaScript-developer”. This new fashion can lead to big trouble , writes Ryan Stewart (Ryan Stewart), developer of interactive web applications and the owner of a consulting company in this area.
The hypothetical apocalypse can develop according to the following scenario. In the fall of 2006, the ECMA association releases the fourth version of the ECMAScript specifications (by the way, this really should happen soon) and a new, improved JavaScript 2.0 with enhanced functionality is born. The only browser that fully supports the new specifications is Firefox. Microsoft decides to make its own small improvements in JavaScript 2.0, which are supported only in IE7. The problem is that now you need to redo all Ajax applications created before this one. There is complete chaos and confusion. Web 2.0 application developers receive thousands of emails from outraged users with questions like "Why doesn't your page work with my internet?".
Of course, the above script does not look very realistic, but it points to the real problem of modern Web 2.0 applications. Most of them depend too much on the only technology that javascript is. In the face of the growing war of browsers (with the release of IE7, the war will begin in full force) this is dangerous. Only a glance at the list of existing ECMAScript dialects is already causing vague concerns. There you can see that the Gecko engines use the JavaScript 1.6 dialect in browsers, and the Internet Explorer browser uses the JScript 5.6 dialect, and some other programs use other dialects. JavaScript 1.6 and JScript 5.6 are based onECMA-262 revision 3 specifications (third version, adopted in 1999). But who guarantees that the fourth version of the specifications will be backward compatible with numerous dialects? If there is no compatibility, then the above scenario may well begin to be implemented.
')
The competition in the world of browsers is seriously increasing, and with the release of IE7, this market will be hotter than ever. “Battle of the standards” is almost guaranteed. It’s easy to imagine that the creators of IE7 and Firefox are implementing various versions of JavaScript that will bind web developers to a particular platform. Something similar has already happened in the past.
As a solution to the problem, Ryan Stewart suggests that developers use the Flex platform and ActionScript 3, the most functional of ECMAScript dialects. Unlike the creators of browsers, Adobe guarantees backward compatibility of all subsequent versions of Flash Player, so that the site created once will always be available, regardless of changes in browsers.
Good old JavaScript unexpectedly ranked among the most fashionable and relevant technologies. Moreover, people began to speak with a serious expression, for example, about the profession “JavaScript-developer”. This new fashion can lead to big trouble , writes Ryan Stewart (Ryan Stewart), developer of interactive web applications and the owner of a consulting company in this area.
The hypothetical apocalypse can develop according to the following scenario. In the fall of 2006, the ECMA association releases the fourth version of the ECMAScript specifications (by the way, this really should happen soon) and a new, improved JavaScript 2.0 with enhanced functionality is born. The only browser that fully supports the new specifications is Firefox. Microsoft decides to make its own small improvements in JavaScript 2.0, which are supported only in IE7. The problem is that now you need to redo all Ajax applications created before this one. There is complete chaos and confusion. Web 2.0 application developers receive thousands of emails from outraged users with questions like "Why doesn't your page work with my internet?".
Of course, the above script does not look very realistic, but it points to the real problem of modern Web 2.0 applications. Most of them depend too much on the only technology that javascript is. In the face of the growing war of browsers (with the release of IE7, the war will begin in full force) this is dangerous. Only a glance at the list of existing ECMAScript dialects is already causing vague concerns. There you can see that the Gecko engines use the JavaScript 1.6 dialect in browsers, and the Internet Explorer browser uses the JScript 5.6 dialect, and some other programs use other dialects. JavaScript 1.6 and JScript 5.6 are based on
')
The competition in the world of browsers is seriously increasing, and with the release of IE7, this market will be hotter than ever. “Battle of the standards” is almost guaranteed. It’s easy to imagine that the creators of IE7 and Firefox are implementing various versions of JavaScript that will bind web developers to a particular platform. Something similar has already happened in the past.
As a solution to the problem, Ryan Stewart suggests that developers use the Flex platform and ActionScript 3, the most functional of ECMAScript dialects. Unlike the creators of browsers, Adobe guarantees backward compatibility of all subsequent versions of Flash Player, so that the site created once will always be available, regardless of changes in browsers.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/4372/
All Articles