Analyzing Web 2.0 Applications with Ajax View


The information published in this post is now out-of-date and contains links which are no longer valid.

—IEBlog Editor, 18 August 2012

Hi everyone,

In June I posted information about a number of developer tools, one of which was Ajax View. Ajax View, developed by Microsoft Research, can help improve a developer’s visibility into their web application’s performance and behavior. Recently, the researchers building Ajax View – Emre Kıcıman and Ben Livshits – released a public version of the tool (licensed for academic or other non-commercial use) so I want to share a link and provide a little more information about it.

What can I do with it?

As shown in the demo from MIX07 and described in detail here, you can use Ajax View to profile a site’s JavaScript from your dev machine. Ajax View includes a few default instrumentation policies for basic profiling (timing based on before and after a function call in the caller, timing based on before and after a function call in the callee, etc.) but you can create a plug-in to track the JavaScript you’re interested in. 

How does it work?

Ajax View is an HTTP proxy that instruments JavaScript as it’s served to the client based on a set of rules defined by plug-ins. The download includes a plug-in that contains a commented sample instrumentation policy. This design has a couple important effects:

  • You can customize Ajax View to monitor exactly the JavaScript behavior you’re looking for, whether it’s about performance, or how people navigate through your site.
  • Using Ajax View does not require modification of either the page source or the browser.

Where do I download it and send feedback?

Visit the Ajax View project siteto download the latest prototype and try it for yourself. 

We’d love to get your feedback on the kind of instrumentation you’d find useful. Let us know what data about your web application’s behavior would help you detect or debug problems. You can send feedback directly to the project team, or, as usual, comment on this post. 

Thanks! 

John Hrvatin
Program Manager
Internet Explorer

Edit: Updated link for “send feedback directly to the project team”

Comments (45)

  1. Edwin Martin says:

    "…released a public version of the tool (licensed for academic or other non-commercial use)".

    So webdevelopers like me can’t use it? Way to go!

    BTW I can’t read the licence (I use Word).

  2. Scott says:

    Not only is the licence aggreement corrupted but the email address ajaxview@microsoft.com that is on the site is not recognised by microsoft’s mail server.

  3. rc says:

    After discussion in last post about what Web developers REALLY need to see in this blog, IE team was offended and began to jeer at blog readers.

  4. NJ says:

    Seems like a good idea, but stops any pages from loading when I try it.  The proxy displays:

    [INFO] Got maps.live.com/ [1 active]

    and then thats it.  Nothing ever makes it back to the browser.

    Hard to test it when it doesn’t even perform it’s basic function of being a proxy.

  5. Emre Kiciman says:

    Scott: I’m trying to figure out what happened to our feedback alias.  In the meanwhile, feel free to get in touch with us directly.  Send an email to both Ben and myself at emrek@microsoft.com and livshits@microsoft.com.  

    Thanks,

    Emre

  6. Emre Kiciman says:

    I’ve fixed the problem with our feedback e-mail.  The changes should be replicated to our external SMTP servers and ajaxview@microsoft.com should start working within 24 hours.  Thanks for your patience.

    NJ: could you email Ben and myself some more details about your setup and what you’re seeing?  We’d like to figure out why its not working for you.

  7. man i love this says:

    So in order to do development in IE I need to pay for an addon?

    This shows 2 things.

    1.) Development in IE is a pain.

    2.) IE was not made, nor tailored for developers

    Way to "support" the community!

    oh and rc is right, thanks for posting about the public bug tracking system, we’ve been waiting for so long to hear something I’m so glad "you heard us"!

    oh wait, no you didn’t, you plain bold face ignored us once again!

    Thanks

  8. Dan says:

    John and Emre— Thanks for a cool new tool.  

    Please ignore the whining here. There are lots of non-webdevelopers who read this blog and are looking for info on betas and stuff and they don’t care about web dev tools.

  9. max says:

    @Dan  Im a web developer, and I can assure you I whine about the lack of web developer tools as well as the lack of info about bug fixing and features in ie8.

    -|-|-|-

    As for this post topic?

    IETeam.slap( WebDevelopers ).target( Face )++;

    (read: Another slap in the web developers face.)

    Once again, not a lick of a word about the number one topic request on this blog.

    Why is it that only X-Members of the Microsoft IE Development Team have enough interest in communicating with the community?!?!

    max

  10. Fred says:

    Max- Perhaps members of the ie team are not permited to talk to the community about their future plans?  non-ms people would not be subject to the same limitation.

  11. AC says:

    @max

    Because engineers aren’t good with people. They need a person who’s good with people to address the public, then take that information to the engineers. Or have an administrative assistant physically carry the specs to the engineers. Either way.

  12. testing... says:

    cant seem to post… testing…

  13. argggghhhh says:

    Just had another WT*?! moment when IE was bombing out on the simplest of JavaScript.

    After a few minutes of digging/tracing, I found the issue.

    document.getElementById()

    Now, I know the issue, I’ve known just as almost everyone else on this blog knows what went wrong.

    So heres my question of the day for the IE development team.  When is this method going to be fixed? IT SAYS "ID" in the gosh darn name of the method for crying out loud!  How hard was it to implement this, and get it so wrong?!

    Please tell me this is your numero uno fix for IE8, this has got to be "todays" most important DOM related method and the glue that holds Web 2.0 together.

    ………..and for those that don’t know what the bug is… put another element on your page, with a attribute called "name", with the same value as the ID you want to match on.  Place it higher in the document than the "real" object you want to match on, load your page, and watch it all fall down.

    apparently the IE version of this method is:

    document.getElementByNameOrId( NameOrID )

    which of course is really funny, because the DOM has this other method, called:

    document.getElementsByName( Name )

    WHICH WAS DESIGNED TO RETURN a NodeList of ALL elements with that Name!

    Does it work? No! Not even supported.

    Ugh! Is it any wonder developers on this blog are screaming their heads off complaining that the IE folks are not responding to the need for a public bug tracking DB.

    IE Feedback: (what ever happened to this?)

    http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/03/24/560095.aspx

    Quote:

    "Many customers have asked us about having a better way to enter IE bugs. It is asked "Why don’t you have Bugzilla like Firefox or other groups do?" We haven’t always had a good answer except it is something that the IE team has never done before. After much discussion on the team, we’ve decided that people are right and that we should have a public way for people to give us feedback or make product suggestions. We wanted to build a system that is searchable and can benefit from the active community that IE has here" – Al Billings

    Key phrase:

    "After much discussion on the team, we’ve decided that people are right and that we should have a public way for people to give us feedback or make product suggestions."

    So, where did it go?! When is it coming back?!

  14. This is very nifty and I like how it measures response times, I encountered some problems and had a work around (using this page for directions)…

    http://research.microsoft.com/projects/ajaxview/AjaxViewUsage-1.htm

    For some reason my IE6 keeps opening typed URLs in Firefox so I ran a standalone IE visiting the URL…

    http://localhost/?&AJAXVIEWREQUEST=GET=main.html

    It didn’t work in Firefox however? I think this has more to do with the bug I have to put up with where inputing a URL manually opens in Firefox instead so I’m not blaming the software download here.

    "Why is it that only X-Members of the Microsoft IE Development Team have enough interest in communicating with the community?!?!"

    @ max

    Please ask yourself this, ‘If I were part of the IE team would I want to post anything on this blog and what is the ratio of IE Team members to people asking questions/making requests?’ The IE team *is* listening however I imagine they are wearing safety helmets when they come to post.

  15. EricLaw [MSFT] says:

    @argggghhhh: Yes, the issue with getElementByID is well known and understood.  Unfortunately, this is yet another of those "break the internet" style bugs.  If we change the default behavior of this function (named as it is or not) then thousands or millions of pages break.  

    Normal users don’t care why web pages break in new browsers; they blame the new browser and uninstall it, taking with it all of the improvements that were made that ~didn’t~ impact compatibility.

    Yes, I find this frustrating too.  

    No, I don’t think we’ll ever reach a point where compatibility doesn’t matter.

  16. Trevore says:

    @EricLaw:  Do you really think that thousands, or worse yet millions of pages rely on the document.getElementById() function returning the first element found with a NAME matching the requested ID?

    If this is true, then hundreds, or thousands of web developers need to seriously examine the code they write!

    1.) This will ONLY work in IE. Not Firefox, Not Opera, Not Konqueror, Not Safari, Not (Insert name of any other browser)

    2.) This is like playing Russian roulette with your web site/application! If a developer is actually DEPENDING on totally INCORRECT behavior of a method in 1 browser, then THEY are asking for trouble, and they SHOULD EXPECT this to BREAK in the VERY NEXT VERSION of the browser.

    Now for the remaining fanboy nay-sayers and all those folks that think the web was designed for IE need to think of the bigger picture here.

    **IF** (and this is a ****REALLY**** big IF….) If you think that changing this, will break the web, then make IE8 take a second param.

    document.getElementById( String ID, Boolean STRICT );

    If STRICT is passed, and it is true, then ONLY ID’s should be valid matches.

    This would be considered a gross hack, but one that I think the community could live with.

    Or better yet, allow PROTOTYPING on HTMLElements, so that we can make our own fixes for this Bug.

    <script type="text/javascript">

    if(window.external){

     //only redefine getElementById if this is IE

     //{adjust for version as req’d}

     HTMLDocument.getElementById = function( id ){

       for(var i=0;i<document.childNodes.length;i++){

         if(document.childNodes.item(i).attributes[‘id’] && document.childNodes.item(i).attributes[‘id’] == id){

           return document.childNodes.item(i);

         }

       }

       return null;

     }

    }

    </script>

    It may not be as efficient as what the browser can provide, BUT AT LEAST IT WOULD BE ACCURATE STABLE, AND TRUSTWORTHY!

  17. Trevore says:

    ad: guess I should have tried the code before posting it. 😉 my sample should have done a ‘deep’ search, not just the root level.

    but the point stands. adding the ability to Prototype on elements will (A) not break anything, and (B) allow developers to fix pretty much every single JavaScript or DOM Bug in IE.

    My new #1 vote is for prototyping to be fixed in IE8!  😛

  18. anphanax says:

    I am glad you guys are making tools, as I *REALLY* appreciate having the developer toolbar (most people use IE, therefore I develop in it to catch any obscure issues). It would be nice if the next IE release contains a way for the toolbar to provide information as to what the XMLHttpRequests are doing instead of going to the trouble of setting up a proxy (its easy, but I am lazy and Firebug does it through the console – which is nice).

    Off-topic:

    It would be nice to have some sort of method to call that makes IE use fixed versions of functions, if that is possible and would not hurt performance too much (preferably not at all). If you have considered that kind of thing before (I’m sure that has gone through your heads at some point) would you mind explaining your thoughts on that?

    Lastly, two things:

    * Any plans to fix that button artwork stretch problem and the un-removable margin for HR tags  (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/883631)?

  19. Dave Massy says:

    @Trevore

    There are exactly those sorts of developers on the web today and Eric’s poitn is extremely valid. Many web developers (not all but unfortuinately way too many) unfortunately use what I call the "Hack it and see" approach to developing, where they copy someone’s code and then hack at it until it does what they want with little to no understanding of how it actually works.

    Nobody is saying that the changes are not needed and the IE team have never said that they will not make the changes. However such changes need to consider compatibility and therefore need to be versioned so that existing content continues to work.

    Thanks

    -Dave

  20. dwarf says:

    @EricLaw [MSFT]:

    What if you put that bug tracking system back online. Then webdevelopers should be warned when they see "ooh the getElementByID is fixed" or when you say "the next IE browser will implement getElementByID correct – so be warned"

    Everyone will spread this fix (because it would be great news!) and if you still didn’t heard about that news then, well I guess your not a real webdeveloper or you don’t take your job seriously. And for all the new people who learn from W3C or any other website they will use getElementByID and will see that it will work.

    And for all the websites that didn’t change in that year well they suck and could be great that they don’t work anymore. People will see: mmm this page sucks i don’t visit anymore and we will have a natural selection of active and good websites.

    A few days ago I was doing something for a company. I’ve made an xhtml mailing template. But damn outlook sux! When you open that email with that xhtml mail in, than it doesn’t look like the original. I don’t know why but if i say in CSS to a DIV: with: 600px; it doesn’t work. The new outlook only shows tables almost correct (and tables are no go!)

    Another thing:

    Why does visual studio generate "wrong" code? The code it generates doesn’t even validate. And it’s all tables and tables 🙁

    and please if you use an XHTML 1.1 DOCTYPE it’s <br />  not <br>! or better: use doctypes!

    This could be a solution for internet explorer if you don’t want that the other pages will break down in the new IE8. Maybe you should check the doctype if they use XHTML 1.1 or any other recent doctype you should say: here only getElementByID works. Older pages that are not updated will not have this new doctype so will not break.

    And please when will there be any good support for CSS? (i’m talking about CSS2.1 not for CSS3.0 that other browsers already begin to support) How nice would it be if we could just use display: table/table-row/table-cell; and get rid of the tables 😀

    or :focus on textareas or inputfields etc.

    And many many unsupported CSS2.1 features.

    Once again Internet Explorer blocks the internet. You guys say "no" to webstandards, you just create your own rules and functions when all the other browsers use the standard correct things. How could we ever evoluate and make good websites without hacks and fixes (for ie) if the IE browser doesn’t want to change or implement the correct things.

    I don’t belive what you have said about "they blame the new browser and uninstall it, taking with it all of the improvements that were made that ~didn’t~ impact compatibility."

    When the new IE8 will implement all the normal things and will fix major bugs than many many (read MILLIONS) of people will cheer, will smile, the news will go around the earth as fast as it could go (trust me it will) and we would say to microsoft and the IE Team: THANKS ! but yeah i think you use just don’t want that or you are scared that you have too much work fixing your microsoft.com wrong code (and this page where I am writing in has 47 errors lol :’) ) 🙂

  21. NJ says:

    Continuing on from my earlier comment about the proxy failing to operate I’ve managed to try it again on another clean system and this time it works fine.

    The original system I tried it on was sitting behind a Microsoft ISA server, but it does have the ISA proxy client software installed so the Ajax View proxy should work even if it does not implement proxy chaining.

    I’ll keep playing with it, but I think it’s probably the ISA server causing the problems.

  22. Tino Zijdel says:

    @EricLaw: "Yes, the issue with getElementByID is well known and understood.  Unfortunately, this is yet another of those "break the internet" style bugs.  If we change the default behavior of this function (named as it is or not) then thousands or millions of pages break."

    The problem with these kind of statements is that I have yet to see data to back up these claims and quantify them. I just fail to see that there is no viable solution thinkable to these kind of problems.

    It’s not about "breaking the web" but more about "fixing the web", we are after all talking about pages that are already broken to a large percentage of users (those not using IE) and you are still needlessly punishing authors who don’t expect and cater for IE’s behaviour (resulting in pages that are broken in IE).

  23. Dave Massy says:

    @Tino:

    Once again people here seem to be missing the message. It is not that the compatibility issue cannot be overcome and is blocking all progress. Clearly that is not the case since a number of severe issues were addressed in IE7.

    Compatibility is however a consideration that means that the IE team cannot change stuff willy nilly and without a lot of consideration. A clear versioning scheme is clearly needed so that existing content continues to function while new content can opt in to the revised behavior.

    Remember also that many of the compatibility issues might only affect a few hundred thousand relatively obscure pages on the internet! However a change might completely cripple a solution used in corporate intranets where IE is the only browser in use. Those companies cannot afford to change and retest their solutions everytime a developer on the IE team so much as farts on the code!

    Compatibility isn’t an excuse for not making changes but it is a justifiable consideration probably second only to security whenever you touch the browser codebase. Some changes might have minimal compat effect but others can have major consequences. Approaching a year after the release of IE7 it still isn’t unusual for me to see a website where rendering is off kilter because the site relies on hacks that used to work in IE6 and no longer do with the CSS behavior now correct to the standard recommendation. A slight rendering problem isn’t something a lot of companies will sweat over. However a DOM change that renders their page unusable will cost them time and money to change. Time and money that they probably want to spend elsewhere.

    Thanks

    -Dave

  24. Tino Zijdel says:

    Dave: I think you can agree that the current situation (having non-standard behaviour in IE and in IE only) is a situation that needs to be resolved rather sooner than later. I do agree that backwards compatibility is a necessity for MS – they will get the blame for breakages even when they are eventually "doing the right thing" by fixing things, but we really need to be able to put this in perspective.

    Besides, I think there is more than one way to adress these backwards compatibility problems. Introducing new opt-in switches imo should only be a last resort since it still punishes authors who are doing the right thing, and it puts a strain on other browser developers since they will probably need to mimic IE’s behaviour which makes interoperability more difficult (I wrote about opt-in some time ago: http://therealcrisp.xs4all.nl/blog/2007/04/22/html5-microsoft-and-the-opt-in-catch/ ).

    I see several other solutions:

    – fix IE’s DOM problems in standards compliant mode only and keep the non-standard behaviour in "quirksmode" (need to quantify if this significantly reduces the impact)

    – fix IE’s DOM problems in the new really-really standards compliant mode MS deems necessary for HTML5

    – if it’s mostly a problem with intranet applications: create the possibility to run multiple versions of IE alongside; companies can then continue to use e.g. IE6 or 7 for these applications while using IE8+ for internet access until the intranet application vendors have fixed their products (with the added advantage that it makes IE more developer-friendly).

    The one thing that is not clear to me is what constitutes "a lot of consideration". The only considerations that we are being told is the backwards compatibility consideration combined with the argument that it might break hundreds, thousands or even millions of sites. Without any actual data to back up this argument this remains guesswork and is therefor a non-argument. If however MS does have such information available it would be really helpfull if they would share that information, not only to prove that this issue really is of a major magnitude but also to provide valuable insight in the current state of the web which might affect and/or could be taken into consideration when drafting new specifications (such as HTML5).

  25. PatriotB says:

    @dwarf:

    "You guys say "no" to webstandards, you just create your own rules and functions when all the other browsers use the standard correct things."

    Yeah, I know, the IE team should never have made non-standard things such as XmlHttpRequest and innerHTML.  They are blocking the internet.

    Seriously though, most of these web standards in question were written after IE had already had their "non-standard" things in place.

    "I don’t belive what you have said about "they blame the new browser and uninstall it, taking with it all of the improvements that were made that ~didn’t~ impact compatibility.""

    Except they do.  When IE7 was released, there were people who wanted to go their bank’s site and couldn’t get in.  They blamed IE.  The average user has no idea that the sites are at fault.

    Plus, if web site developers for high-profile sites  (e.g. Wells Fargo) can’t even do user agent sniffing correctly, what makes you think they can use things like getElementById correctly?

    In some ways, the consideration is less that "there are hundreds of thousands of pages out there that would break", but that there are a few hundred key sites that would break and thus impact millions of people that use those sites.

  26. Fduch says:

    I wonder what’s the terget consumer group of IE7?

    As a user I find it horrible having to deal with crashes, hangings, 100% CPU, strange and obviously wrong error messages every day. Heck! I cannot even start properly hanging 1/20 times. And as a developer (thankfully not a web-developer) I must say that any programmer that doesn’t disable listbox layout and rendering while adding/deleting 1000+ items is 100% idiot. (History khem-khem) Maybe he writes good code 90% of time, bat that 10% of bad code are just TOO bad.

    As a developer see no native support for .Net addons that means more and more unsafe ActiveX controls to get people hacked.

    And about web developement… I’m not one. but from what I see here, it’s horrible.

    So who is IE targeted at? The only people left are people who browse for porn…err…entertainment sites and don’t value their time and data.

  27. Recently, MS made a public release of the Ajax view tool and I thought it’s surely worth mentioning and

  28. walter says:

    For Dave Massy and all developers on this thread about .getElementById( ID ) not following standards (and Eric, notice the ‘d’ on this method is lowercase).

    Since 90% of the issues here, are to do with JavaScript, just add an IE only method to (as anphanax put it) use the fixed versions of the functions.

    So,

    <script type="text/javascript">

     if(window.external.followSpec){

       //per page setting

       window.external.followSpec( true );

     }

    </script>

    With this, developers can decide for themselves, if they want to call the correct versions of methods, or the broken ones.

    Then, after 12 months, when it is painfully obvious that every developer on the planet is calling the fixed versions, there won’t be any "we think this might, maybe, kind of, potentially break someones sandbox homepage" kind of garbage, and we can finally move on and just replace the old methods.

    Seriously though, is there anyone out that that expects .getElementById( ID ) to match on "name"? Seriously! Speak up if you are out there, Microsoft needs to know that this is not an issue, otherwise they won’t fix this!

  29. Aaron says:

    It’s too bad that the license prohibits any use related to commercial use:

    "You may not use or distribute this Software or any derivative works in any form for commercial purposes. Examples of commercial purposes would be running business operations, licensing, leasing, or selling the Software, distributing the Software for use with commercial products, using the Software in the creation or use of commercial products or any other activity which purpose is to procure a commercial gain to you or others."

    The developers who care most about performance are those related to ‘commercial purposes.’

    Oh well. It sounded interesting.

  30. rachel says:

    I’m having trouble sifting through the comments on this blog.

    Has getElementById() been fixed in IE8?

    Has createElement() been fixed in IE8?

    Has getElementByName() been fixed in IE8?

    Has setElement() been fixed in IE8?

    I don’t care what the fix is, i.e. you need to set a doctype, use a CC, or set a JavaScript property.

    Looking forward to the update.

    Thanks

  31. rc says:

    @rachel

    I have recently written that we won’t see any news about new IE versions during next few years. You may trust me or not but let’s remember this conversation, for instance, in 2010.

  32. Dan Walker says:

    RC: On one hand, we’ve got you, some random dude on the internet who doesn’t even use his real name, making a totally unfounded claim with zero information to back it up (and no sensible explanation of why it would even be possibly accurate).  

    On the other hand, we have the IE team, who has clearly stated that they’re working on the next version of the browser, they’re not ready to talk about it yet, but when they are, they’ll do it here.

    I’m trusting the IE team on this one.

  33. scott says:

    @Dan Walker

    The IE team may well be working on ie 8 but we have no idea.  They haven’t posted any details about it on this blog and they haven’t posted any details on anything they plan to fix.

    The developers on this blog would love to hear that bug ___ has been fixed, and they are working on bug ______ but we know that isn’t going to happen (MS is very tight lipped about this).

    However without going into specifics, they COULD post something to indicate what they have/are working on.

    E.G. (a hopeful sample post)

    ********************************************

    "The IE team has been working hard on fixing many of the non-spec-conforming JavaScript issues in IE, as mentioned here (link), here (link), and here (link).  We can’t eloborate on details at the moment, but we have made it possible in current, internal versions of IE in development to call the following native methods and expect accurate, correct results:

    a.) getElementById( ID )

    b.) createElement( tagName )

    c.) setAttribute( attName, attValue )

    d.) getAttribute( attName )

    Developers will need to indicate to IE that they would prefer the corrected behavior methods instead of the legacy (backwards compatible) versions.

    We will be providing details on how the indication will be done later, when we start to release alpha versions of IE8.

    Note: The ETA of IE8 alpha versions is not on the horizon yet, we will notify you when we get closer to that date.  Therefore please don’t ask when they will be released, as we will be unable to answer at this time.

    Thank you

    First, Last (Position) [MSFT]"

    ********************************************

    With a post like this we would actually know that Microsoft has heard our concerns with the significant delta between the Spec version of DOM methods and the implementation in IE, most importantly that they are actually doing something about it!

    Scott D.

  34. Dan Walker says:

    So, right after they say "We can’t elaborate on details right now", they should elaborate on the specific details of what’s being fixed?  

    Got it.  Very clever.

  35. dwarf says:

    pfff

    please support the CSS2.1 (and yeah why not like the other browsers some CCS3.0 features)

    And what a stupid thing from microsoft.

    You should make a website and mail it to yourself and open it with outlook 2007 (it’s been generated by word o_O ) padding doesn’t work, float doesn’t work, etc etc

    and what about visual studio: bad bad bad code it generates, same for frontpage.

    All good and well (I hope that IE will use the correct javascript and CSS syntax) but then some other ms products need to generate also correct/validating code!

    and I saw that video from MS for the internet explorer web developer bar… The code in that video looks TERRIBLE!

    they write/wrote everyting in caps like:

    BORDER-BOTTOM  LIST-STYLE-TYPE

    I’m really wondering if the coders from ms can make a real valid website using notepad :s I can do better i’m sure

    anyone has some big website to make some pressure on MS? you’re welcome

  36. dwarf says:

    pfff

    please support the CSS2.1 (and yeah why not like the other browsers some CCS3.0 features)

    And what a stupid thing from microsoft.

    You should make a website and mail it to yourself and open it with outlook 2007 (it’s been generated by word o_O ) padding doesn’t work, float doesn’t work, etc etc

    and what about visual studio: bad bad bad code it generates, same for frontpage.

    All good and well (I hope that IE will use the correct javascript and CSS syntax) but then some other ms products need to generate also correct/validating code!

    and I saw that video from MS for the internet explorer web developer bar… The code in that video looks TERRIBLE!

    they write/wrote everyting in caps like:

    BORDER-BOTTOM  LIST-STYLE-TYPE

    I’m really wondering if the coders from ms can make a real valid website using notepad :s I can do better i’m sure

    anyone has some big website to make some pressure on MS? you’re welcome

  37. ash says:

    @Aaron

    You’re not allowed to distribute as part of a commercial application.  That’s all.  Why are you being such a moron?

  38. @ash: Sorry, you are wrong. It clearly states "using the Software in the creation or use of commercial products".. So you can’t test a commercial product using AjaxView.

    So basically it’s useless. Too bad.

  39. ash says:

    @Soren

    Yeah looks like you’re right.  Sorry for the name calling.

  40. Anphanax says:

    "and I saw that video from MS for the internet explorer web developer bar… The code in that video looks TERRIBLE!

    they write/wrote everyting in caps like:

    BORDER-BOTTOM  LIST-STYLE-TYPE "

    Open "%ProgramFiles%MicrosoftInternet Explorer Developer Toolbarvs_styles.css" in your editor of choice.

    Place "text-transform: lowercase;" where desired. Viola! Problem solved :P.

    "You should make a website and mail it to yourself and open it with outlook 2007 (it’s been generated by word o_O ) padding doesn’t work, float doesn’t work, etc etc"

    You will have to complain to the Office team about this, since they decided to throw out a decent rendering engine (yeah, I know it previously used Internet Explorer – and I stand by that statement) and replace it with something that feels… IE 4ish (and then someone said… "Hey, let’s rip out any decent support for the INPUT tag! Screw those evil bastards who want to be sent forms users filled out on their website in the same format! HOW DARE THEY! *throws chair*").

  41. dwarf says:

    it’s not the fact that i can’t change it to lowercase but it’s a fact that ms team shows the wrong way again of doing it. why caps… everything is lowercase we don’t live in the BASIC/ASSEMBLY time where everything should be written with caps because it looks nice.

    Yeah where can i complain about that? 🙂

  42. Carlos says:

    What’s wrong with the license file? Instead of RTF (which it claims to be) it is some kind of zipped XML. Word 2003 couldn’t open it.

  43. John Hrvatin talked about Web Development Tools for Internet Explorer at Microsoft TechEd 2007 in Orlando

  44. Sam says:

    "You should make a website and mail it to yourself and open it with outlook 2007 (it’s been generated by word o_O ) padding doesn’t work, float doesn’t work, etc etc"

    dwarf: I think they do. The Office team made the decision to use the Word HTML rendering engine rather than the IE one as it did previously, so people who styled messages in Outlook (which uses the Word editor) could get them rendered as they were styled in Outlook. That would’ve all been fine, had the Word HTML rendering engine actually been up to task.

    Oh, and why do I know they do? Because of this at the top of the Xbox newsletter:

    "Please add Xbox@email.xbox.com to your address book to ensure delivery.

    Read this issue online if you can’t see the images or are using Outlook 2007."