Julien. This is just my interpretation of the "facts". I could well be wrong.
Although my original code for the conflict thing could well be called an Ajax solution it's not what Jess thinks of as Ajax. From his article:
Ajax incorporates:
* standards-based presentation using XHTML and CSS;
* dynamic display and interaction using the Document Object Model;
* data interchange and manipulation using XML and XSLT;
* asynchronous data retrieval using XMLHttpRequest;
* and JavaScript binding everything together.
It's the fourth point that brings it closer to cross-browser support. My conflict code used XML Islands, which have less support outside of IE than the XMLHttpReqeust object does. By using HTMLHttpRequests we can do it the same thing in most modern browser.
Julien. This is just my interpretation of the "facts". I could well be wrong.
Although my original code for the conflict thing could well be called an Ajax solution it's not what Jess thinks of as Ajax. From his article:
Ajax incorporates:
* standards-based presentation using XHTML and CSS;
* dynamic display and interaction using the Document Object Model;
* data interchange and manipulation using XML and XSLT;
* asynchronous data retrieval using XMLHttpRequest;
* and JavaScript binding everything together.
It's the fourth point that brings it closer to cross-browser support. My conflict code used XML Islands, which have less support outside of IE than the XMLHttpReqeust object does. By using HTMLHttpRequests we can do it the same thing in most modern browser.
Make sense?