This question has a discussion of progressive enhancement. My question is about the alternative type of web application. If you have a web app in which the UI is constructed almost entirely in Javascript, won't gracefully degrade, has a desktop feel, etc., what is that kind of web application called?
这个问题讨论了渐进增强。我的问题是关于替代类型的Web应用程序。如果您有一个Web应用程序,其中UI几乎完全是用Javascript构建的,不会优雅地降级,有桌面感觉等等,这种Web应用程序叫什么?
7 个解决方案
#1
to me, what you describe seems to be a JavaScript based fat client ... i see nothing wrong in that ...
对我来说,你所描述的似乎是一个基于JavaScript的胖客户端...我认为没有错...
the thing is, that everyone forgets is that HTML means hypertext markup language ... it is a format for describing documents and was never designed to capture the functionality that some HTML-based apps offer nowadays ...
问题是,每个人忘记的是HTML意味着超文本标记语言...它是一种描述文档的格式,并且从未被设计为捕获一些基于HTML的应用程序现在提供的功能......
the answer "RIA" seems the best to me ... of course that includes flash and silverlight ... but your choice of HTML+JS is completely arbitrary in this case, because you manipulate the HTML DocumentObjectModel with JavaScript as a flash developer would manipulate the flash DisplayObjectModel with ActionScript ...
答案“RIA”对我来说似乎是最好的...当然包括flash和silverlight ......但是你选择的HTML + JS在这种情况下是完全随意的,因为你用JavaScript操纵HTML DocumentObjectModel作为flash开发者会使用ActionScript操作Flash DisplayObjectModel ...
- there are simply web apps, that are document and form based ... they have a CRUD infrastructure for some type of data, that is accessed in a RESTful, or at least RESTish way ... this type of apps can employ progressive enhancement, using HTML to capture its semantics and plain HTTP for all client<->server communication... i'd tend to simply call this kind of web app a web site ... having a bit of funky AJAX won't change that really ... i mean, from a simple guest book, to a forum, to *, the basic idea never changes ... and a guest book does not make a web application, does it?
- there are web apps, where the state is fully maintained by a much richer client, because these apps do a lot of granular data manipulation, as opposed to the document based CRUD web apps, and to me, this is the type of web application actually deserving the name, but i'd call them RIAs, to emphasize the difference ... in some cases this solution is faster, more lightweight, scalable, usable, easier and faster to develop/maintain/extend, and simply more natural ... this choice is often based on the type of data they deal with, as well as the functionality exposed for manipulating that data ... for example, if you were to implement a game like tetris, progressive enhancement wouldn't be the way to go ... instead, in order to create such apps, willful misuse of HTML is required ... so what? :-D
有简单的网络应用程序,基于文档和表单...他们有一些CRUD基础设施用于某种类型的数据,可以用RESTful或至少REST的方式访问......这种类型的应用程序可以使用渐进增强,使用HTML捕获其语义和普通HTTP用于所有客户端< - >服务器通信...我倾向于简单地将这种Web应用程序称为网站...有一点时髦的AJAX不会真正改变它...我的意思是,从简单的留言簿,到论坛,到*,基本的想法永远不会改变......而留言簿不会成为Web应用程序,是吗?
有网络应用程序,其中状态由更丰富的客户端完全维护,因为这些应用程序执行大量细粒度数据操作,而不是基于文档的CRUD Web应用程序,对我而言,这实际上是Web应用程序的类型值得称呼,但我称之为RIA,强调差异......在某些情况下,这种解决方案更快,更轻,可扩展,更实用,更容易,更快速地开发/维护/扩展,并且更加自然......这个选择通常是基于他们处理的数据类型,以及操纵数据所暴露的功能......例如,如果你要实现像俄罗斯方块这样的游戏,渐进式增强将无法通过go ...相反,为了创建这样的应用程序,需要故意滥用HTML ...那么呢? :-D
so, yeah, RIA is the right word, i'd say ... and opposed to others, i think first of all, it is a great, easy and powerful way of deploying functionality ... i mean i get the whole "inaccessible" and "incrawlable" thing ... but the latter is often pointless, and the first one is a problem you can't address properly, unless for example screen readers read whatever is in the DOM, instead of spitting out the original page ... but that's the problem you face with "real", i.e. desktop like, apps ...
所以,是的,RIA是正确的词,我会说...并且反对其他人,我认为首先,它是一种强大,简单和强大的部署功能的方式......我的意思是我得到整体“难以接近的“和”不可抓取的“东西......但后者通常是毫无意义的,第一个是你无法正确解决的问题,除非例如屏幕阅读器读取DOM中的任何内容,而不是吐出原始页面...但这就是你面对“真实”的问题,即像桌面一样的应用......
greetz
back2dos
#2
Do you mean this type or the opposite of this type:
你的意思是这种类型或与此类型相反:
"Rich Internet Application" where you could have an application that runs on for example AIR.
“富Internet应用程序”,您可以在其中运行例如AIR的应用程序。
#3
Monolithic?
#4
Well, really the opposite of "progressive enhancement" is "graceful degradation", even though they basically achieve the same thing.
嗯,真正与“渐进增强”相反的是“优雅退化”,即使它们基本上达到了同样的目的。
Progressive enhancement means you start off with plain old HTML for older browsers, then enhance it in stages, with cross-browser CSS, additional CSS (e.g. CSS3 styles), Javascript and AJAX.
Graceful degradation means you rush headlong into creating a Rich Internet Experience, then tack on alternatives for people without Javascript/CSS.
渐进式增强意味着您可以从旧浏览器的普通旧HTML开始,然后使用跨浏览器CSS,其他CSS(例如CSS3样式),Javascript和AJAX分阶段进行增强。优雅的降级意味着您急于创建富Internet体验,然后为没有Javascript / CSS的人提供替代方案。
Anyway to answer your question, I'd probably call it "ungraceful degradation". Alternatives:
无论如何回答你的问题,我可能会称之为“不合理的退化”。备择方案:
- Badly designed
- Uncrawlable (from search engine perspective)
- Inaccessible (credit: Chuck)
不可抓取(从搜索引擎的角度来看)
无法进入(信用:查克)
#5
Inaccessible.
#6
It just doesn't degrade well.
它不会很好地降解。
I'm not sure I'd categorise applications as progessively enhanced, because that inferrs that there is some sort of baseline. How far back should an app degrade before it's considered as 'progressively enhanced'?
我不确定我是否会将应用程序归类为强化增强,因为这会推断存在某种基线。应用程序在被视为“逐步增强”之前应该退回多久?
At a push, I'd say the app is dependant on certain features of the browser - maybe it is 'edge dependant' or 'modern browser only'?
在推动时,我会说该应用程序依赖于浏览器的某些功能 - 可能是“依赖于边缘”或“仅限现代浏览器”?
#7
UI is constructed almost entirely in Javascript, won't gracefully degrade
UI几乎完全是用Javascript构建的,不会优雅地降级
Arrogant. Presumptive. Illegal (depending on specifics of application and jurisdiction).
傲慢。推定。非法(取决于申请和管辖权的具体情况)。
#1
to me, what you describe seems to be a JavaScript based fat client ... i see nothing wrong in that ...
对我来说,你所描述的似乎是一个基于JavaScript的胖客户端...我认为没有错...
the thing is, that everyone forgets is that HTML means hypertext markup language ... it is a format for describing documents and was never designed to capture the functionality that some HTML-based apps offer nowadays ...
问题是,每个人忘记的是HTML意味着超文本标记语言...它是一种描述文档的格式,并且从未被设计为捕获一些基于HTML的应用程序现在提供的功能......
the answer "RIA" seems the best to me ... of course that includes flash and silverlight ... but your choice of HTML+JS is completely arbitrary in this case, because you manipulate the HTML DocumentObjectModel with JavaScript as a flash developer would manipulate the flash DisplayObjectModel with ActionScript ...
答案“RIA”对我来说似乎是最好的...当然包括flash和silverlight ......但是你选择的HTML + JS在这种情况下是完全随意的,因为你用JavaScript操纵HTML DocumentObjectModel作为flash开发者会使用ActionScript操作Flash DisplayObjectModel ...
- there are simply web apps, that are document and form based ... they have a CRUD infrastructure for some type of data, that is accessed in a RESTful, or at least RESTish way ... this type of apps can employ progressive enhancement, using HTML to capture its semantics and plain HTTP for all client<->server communication... i'd tend to simply call this kind of web app a web site ... having a bit of funky AJAX won't change that really ... i mean, from a simple guest book, to a forum, to *, the basic idea never changes ... and a guest book does not make a web application, does it?
- there are web apps, where the state is fully maintained by a much richer client, because these apps do a lot of granular data manipulation, as opposed to the document based CRUD web apps, and to me, this is the type of web application actually deserving the name, but i'd call them RIAs, to emphasize the difference ... in some cases this solution is faster, more lightweight, scalable, usable, easier and faster to develop/maintain/extend, and simply more natural ... this choice is often based on the type of data they deal with, as well as the functionality exposed for manipulating that data ... for example, if you were to implement a game like tetris, progressive enhancement wouldn't be the way to go ... instead, in order to create such apps, willful misuse of HTML is required ... so what? :-D
有简单的网络应用程序,基于文档和表单...他们有一些CRUD基础设施用于某种类型的数据,可以用RESTful或至少REST的方式访问......这种类型的应用程序可以使用渐进增强,使用HTML捕获其语义和普通HTTP用于所有客户端< - >服务器通信...我倾向于简单地将这种Web应用程序称为网站...有一点时髦的AJAX不会真正改变它...我的意思是,从简单的留言簿,到论坛,到*,基本的想法永远不会改变......而留言簿不会成为Web应用程序,是吗?
有网络应用程序,其中状态由更丰富的客户端完全维护,因为这些应用程序执行大量细粒度数据操作,而不是基于文档的CRUD Web应用程序,对我而言,这实际上是Web应用程序的类型值得称呼,但我称之为RIA,强调差异......在某些情况下,这种解决方案更快,更轻,可扩展,更实用,更容易,更快速地开发/维护/扩展,并且更加自然......这个选择通常是基于他们处理的数据类型,以及操纵数据所暴露的功能......例如,如果你要实现像俄罗斯方块这样的游戏,渐进式增强将无法通过go ...相反,为了创建这样的应用程序,需要故意滥用HTML ...那么呢? :-D
so, yeah, RIA is the right word, i'd say ... and opposed to others, i think first of all, it is a great, easy and powerful way of deploying functionality ... i mean i get the whole "inaccessible" and "incrawlable" thing ... but the latter is often pointless, and the first one is a problem you can't address properly, unless for example screen readers read whatever is in the DOM, instead of spitting out the original page ... but that's the problem you face with "real", i.e. desktop like, apps ...
所以,是的,RIA是正确的词,我会说...并且反对其他人,我认为首先,它是一种强大,简单和强大的部署功能的方式......我的意思是我得到整体“难以接近的“和”不可抓取的“东西......但后者通常是毫无意义的,第一个是你无法正确解决的问题,除非例如屏幕阅读器读取DOM中的任何内容,而不是吐出原始页面...但这就是你面对“真实”的问题,即像桌面一样的应用......
greetz
back2dos
#2
Do you mean this type or the opposite of this type:
你的意思是这种类型或与此类型相反:
"Rich Internet Application" where you could have an application that runs on for example AIR.
“富Internet应用程序”,您可以在其中运行例如AIR的应用程序。
#3
Monolithic?
#4
Well, really the opposite of "progressive enhancement" is "graceful degradation", even though they basically achieve the same thing.
嗯,真正与“渐进增强”相反的是“优雅退化”,即使它们基本上达到了同样的目的。
Progressive enhancement means you start off with plain old HTML for older browsers, then enhance it in stages, with cross-browser CSS, additional CSS (e.g. CSS3 styles), Javascript and AJAX.
Graceful degradation means you rush headlong into creating a Rich Internet Experience, then tack on alternatives for people without Javascript/CSS.
渐进式增强意味着您可以从旧浏览器的普通旧HTML开始,然后使用跨浏览器CSS,其他CSS(例如CSS3样式),Javascript和AJAX分阶段进行增强。优雅的降级意味着您急于创建富Internet体验,然后为没有Javascript / CSS的人提供替代方案。
Anyway to answer your question, I'd probably call it "ungraceful degradation". Alternatives:
无论如何回答你的问题,我可能会称之为“不合理的退化”。备择方案:
- Badly designed
- Uncrawlable (from search engine perspective)
- Inaccessible (credit: Chuck)
不可抓取(从搜索引擎的角度来看)
无法进入(信用:查克)
#5
Inaccessible.
#6
It just doesn't degrade well.
它不会很好地降解。
I'm not sure I'd categorise applications as progessively enhanced, because that inferrs that there is some sort of baseline. How far back should an app degrade before it's considered as 'progressively enhanced'?
我不确定我是否会将应用程序归类为强化增强,因为这会推断存在某种基线。应用程序在被视为“逐步增强”之前应该退回多久?
At a push, I'd say the app is dependant on certain features of the browser - maybe it is 'edge dependant' or 'modern browser only'?
在推动时,我会说该应用程序依赖于浏览器的某些功能 - 可能是“依赖于边缘”或“仅限现代浏览器”?
#7
UI is constructed almost entirely in Javascript, won't gracefully degrade
UI几乎完全是用Javascript构建的,不会优雅地降级
Arrogant. Presumptive. Illegal (depending on specifics of application and jurisdiction).
傲慢。推定。非法(取决于申请和管辖权的具体情况)。