Talk:AJAJ

Acronym AJAJ not in mainstream use ?

It seems that the acronym ajaj hasn't gained mainstream adoptance, and that AJAX is being used interchangeably for Xml and Json data.

e.g. Searching Stackoverflow for questions tagged ajax and json returns nearly 3000 questions (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ajax+json)

Whereas at the time of writing, ajaj isn't even a tag on the site. (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ajaj)

--Nonnb (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe that's because there's no Wikipedia article yet to "prove" that it's a "thing" :D. I've actually taken this stub and will be expanding on the actual article in my User Sandbox. I believe it is important to have this article. It is cited to having been used in the past. I personally use this framework when I develop (meaning I develop with Asynchronous JavaScript and JSON), and while AJAX sounds better, it is technically inaccurate to state you are doing so if you are not using the framework with XML. Right? So, my vote is yes. Secondly, tags can easily be created by anyone with enough experience in StackOverflow. Danielbullis (talk) 19:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't here to make things famous - its job is to have encyclopedic articles on things that are already notable. I agree that this is widely used, but the current references (stackoverflow? w3schools?) are not really optimal. I think it is good enough though, and the actual content seems accurate. I however don't see that the term "AJAJ" is used very widely, so maybe this belongs as a section in the AJAX article. πr² (t • c) 05:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

February 25, 2013

Any input from people with web dev experience on whether to include AJAJ is highly appreciated. Personally, I use the AJAJ framework and have never officially used the "AJAX" framework - meaning, I have never actually made XML requests. But, I HAVE made requests for JSON. I am doing further research into the matter. As it stands, my hypothesis is that most developers are using the AJAJ method over the AJAX method. However, "AJAX" sounds cooler, and though the term is used more frequently, the framework itself is not (my hypothesis). Therefore, it is not necessarily accurate to call every asynchronous action that takes place from within JavaScript over the server "AJAX." As such, I believe it is prudent to provide a description of AJAJ, as it is in fact a framework, albeit not always called AJAJ. Thoughts? Danielbullis (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

This article has problems

• What is all this talk of 'its predecessor AJAX'? AJAX is the normal industry term, regardless of the return data type (XML, HTML, JSON, CSV, text...), and - as a term - it is not deceased.
• The section Similarities with AJAX makes a bad job of explaining the A, for asynchronous, as in Asynchronous I/O, but ends up talking instead about JavaScript's ability to alter the DOM of a loaded and displayed page dynamically, and then putting in some muddled thinking about the way HTTP requests work.

I don't have time at the moment, but I will be back, looking for references. --Nigelj (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)