From 1000 goto 2000



Rich Internet application

Source :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Internet_application

Rich Internet applications (RIAs) are web applications that have the features and functionality of traditional desktop applications. RIAs typically form a stateful client application with a separate services layer on the backend.

RIAs typically do the following:

Contents

//<![CDATA[
if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = “show”; var tocHideText = “hide”; showTocToggle(); }
//]]>

History

The term “rich Internet application” was introduced in a white paper of March 2002 by Macromedia (now merged into Adobe),[1] though the concept had existed for a number of years earlier under names such as:

Traditional web applications centered all activity around a client-server architecture with a thin client. Under this system, all processing is done on the server, and the client is only used to display static (in this case HTML) content. The biggest drawback with this system is that all interaction with the application must pass through the server, which requires data to be sent to the server, the server to respond, and the page to be reloaded on the client with the response. By using a client side technology which can execute instructions on the client’s computer, RIAs can circumvent this slow and synchronous loop for many user interactions. This difference is somewhat analogous to the difference between “terminal and mainframe” and client-server/fat client approaches.

Internet standards have evolved slowly and continually over time to accommodate these techniques, so it is hard to draw a strict line between what constitutes an RIA and what does not. But all RIAs share one characteristic: they introduce an intermediate layer of code, often called a client engine, between the user and the server. This client engine is usually downloaded as part of the instantiation of the application, and may be supplemented by further code downloads as use of the application progresses. The client engine acts as an extension of the browser, and usually takes over responsibility for rendering the application’s user interface and for server communication.

What can be done in an RIA may be limited by the capabilities of the system used on the client. But in general, the client engine is programmed to perform application functions that its designer believes will enhance some aspect of the user interface, or improve its responsiveness when handling certain user interactions, compared to a standard Web browser implementation. Also, while simply adding a client engine does not force an application to depart from the normal synchronous pattern of interactions between browser and server, in most RIAs the client engine performs additional asynchronous communications with servers.

Benefits

Although developing applications to run in a web browser is a much more limiting, difficult, and intricate process than developing a regular desktop application, the efforts are often justified because:

  • installation footprint is smaller — overhead for updating and distributing the application is trivial, or significantly reduced compared to a desktop or OS native application
  • updates/upgrades to new versions can be automatic or transparent to the end user
  • users can use the application from any computer with an internet connection
  • many tools exist to allow off-line use of applications, such as Adobe AIR, Google Gears, Curl, and other technologies
  • most RIA techologies allow the user experience to be consistent, regardless of what operating system the client uses.
  • web-based applications are generally less prone to viral infection than running an actual executable

Because RIAs employ a client-side engine to interact with the user, they are, when compared with “traditional” web applications:

  • Richer. They can offer user-interface behaviors not obtainable using only the HTML widgets available to standard browser-based Web applications. This richer functionality may include anything that can be implemented in the technology being used on the client side, including drag and drop, using a slider to change data, calculations performed only by the client and which do not need to be sent back to the server, for example, a mortgage calculator.
  • More responsive. The interface behaviors are typically much more responsive than those of a standard Web browser that must always interact with a remote server.

The most sophisticated examples of RIAs exhibit a look and feel approaching that of a desktop environment. Using a client engine can also produce other performance benefits:

  • Client/Server balance. The demand for client and server computing resources is better balanced, so that the Web server need not be the workhorse that it is with a traditional Web application. This frees server resources, allowing the same server hardware to handle more client sessions concurrently.
  • Asynchronous communication. The client engine can interact with the server without waiting for the user to perform an interface action such as clicking on a button or link. This allows the user to view and interact with the page asynchronously from the client engine’s communication with the server. This option allows RIA designers to move data between the client and the server without making the user wait. Perhaps the most common application of this is pre-fetching data, in which an application anticipates a future need for certain data and downloads it to the client before the user requests it, thereby speeding up a subsequent response. Google Maps uses this technique to load adjacent map segments to the client before the user scrolls them into view.
  • Network efficiency. The network traffic may also be significantly reduced because an application-specific client engine can be more intelligent than a standard Web browser when deciding what data needs to be exchanged with servers. This can speed up individual requests or responses because less data is being transferred for each interaction, and overall network load is reduced. However, over-use of asynchronous calls and pre-fetching techniques can neutralize or even reverse this potential benefit. Because the code cannot anticipate exactly what every user will do next, it is common for such techniques to download extra data, not all of which is actually needed, to many or all clients.

Shortcomings

Shortcomings and restrictions associated with RIAs are:

  • Sandboxing. Because RIAs run within a sandbox, they have restricted access to system resources. If assumptions about access to resources are incorrect, RIAs may fail to operate correctly.
  • Enabled scripting. JavaScript or another scripting language is often required. If the user has disabled active scripting in their browser, the RIA may not function properly, if at all.
  • Client processing speed. To achieve platform independence, some RIAs use client-side scripts written in interpreted languages such as JavaScript, with a consequential loss of performance (a serious issue with mobile devices). This is not an issue with compiled client languages such as Java, where performance is comparable to that of traditional compiled languages, or with Flash, Curl, or Silverlight, in which the compiled code is run by a Flash, Curl or Silverlight plugin. Several web browser manufacturers have released or are working on new JavaScript engines to accelerate execution of JavaScript, for example TraceMonkey, the Javascript engine used in Mozilla Firefox, will be optimized using “Trace Trees” in version 3.1 of the browser, and Google Chrome web browser has the V8 JavaScript engine, which also accelerates JavaScript execution. These two technologies have both evolved due to the increasing usage of JavaScript and the growth of rich internet applications.
  • Script download time. Although it does not have to be installed, the additional client-side intelligence (or client engine) of RIA applications needs to be delivered by the server to the client. While much of this is usually automatically cached it needs to be transferred at least once. Depending on the size and type of delivery, script download time may be unpleasantly long. RIA developers can lessen the impact of this delay by compressing the scripts, and by staging their delivery over multiple pages of an application.
  • Loss of integrity. If the application-base is X/HTML, conflicts arise between the goal of an application (which naturally wants to be in control of its presentation and behaviour) and the goals of X/HTML (which naturally wants to give away control). The DOM interface for X/HTML makes it possible to create RIAs, but by doing so makes it impossible to guarantee correct function. Because an RIA client can modify the RIA’s basic structure and override presentation and behaviour, it can cause failure of the application to work properly on the client side. Eventually, this problem could be solved by new client-side mechanisms that granted an RIA client more limited permission to modify only those resources within the scope of its application. (Standard software running natively does not have this problem because by definition a program automatically possesses all rights to all its allocated resources).
  • Loss of visibility to search engines. Search engines may not be able to index the text content of the application.
  • Dependence on an Internet connection. While the ideal network-enabled replacement for a desktop application would allow users to be “occasionally connected”, wandering in and out of hot-spots or from office to office, special platforms (e.g. Adobe AIR, Google Gears, Curl) are required to allow off-line functionality for RIA applications.
  • Accessibility. There are a lot of known Web accessibility issues in RIAs, most notably the fact that screen readers have a hard time detecting dynamic changes (caused by JavaScript) in HTML content. The WAI-ARIA suite provides a solution for this problem (via Live Regions); as well as providing a way of adding critical role, state and property information to DHTML based user interfaces.
  • No deployment. In general, rich internet applications cannot be deployed the way traditional desktop applications can be deployed. There are, however, some exceptions to this (e.g. Adobe AIR and Curl).
  • Security Concerns. Several RIA frameworks, such as Adobe AIR, provide much more access to a user’s local operating system than the older technologies they are built upon, such as Adobe Flash. This added power in the hands of developers creates the potential for RIA applications to enable traditional web vulnerabilities, like Cross Site Scripting, to be used to attack desktop users and possibly spread Malware[2].

Software development complications

The advent of RIA technologies has introduced considerable additional complexity into Web applications. Traditional Web applications built using only standard HTML, having a relatively simple software architecture and being constructed using a limited set of development options, are relatively easy to design and manage. For the person or organization using RIA technologies to deliver a Web application, their additional complexity makes them harder to design, test, measure, and support.

Use of RIA technology poses several new service level management (SLM) challenges, not all of which are completely solved today. SLM concerns are not always the focus of application developers, and are rarely if ever perceived by application users, but they are vital to the successful delivery of an online application. Aspects of the RIA architecture that complicate management processes[3] are:

  • RIA architecture breaks the Web page paradigm. Traditional Web applications can be viewed as a series of Web pages, each of which requires a distinct download, initiated by an HTTP GET request. This model has been characterized as the Web page paradigm. RIAs invalidate this model, introducing additional asynchronous server communications to support a more responsive user interface. In RIAs, the time to complete a page download may no longer correspond to something a user perceives as important, because (for example) the client engine may be prefetching some of the downloaded content for future use. New measurement techniques must be devised for RIAs, to permit reporting of response time quantities that reflect the user’s experience. In the absence of standard tools that do this, RIA developers must instrument their application code to produce the measurement data needed for SLM.
  • Asynchronous communication makes it harder to isolate performance problems. Paradoxically, actions taken to enhance application responsiveness also make it harder to measure, understand, report on, and manage responsiveness. Some RIAs do not issue any further HTTP GET requests from the browser after their first page, using asynchronous requests from the client engine to initiate all subsequent downloads. The RIA client engine may be programmed to continually download new content and refresh the display, or (in applications using the Comet approach) a server-side engine can keep pushing new content to the browser over a connection that never closes. In these cases, the concept of a “page download” is no longer applicable. These applications are commonly known as refreshless. These complications make it harder to measure and subdivide application response times, a fundamental requirement for problem isolation and service level management. Tools designed to measure traditional Web applications may — depending on the details of the application and the tool — report such applications either as a single Web page per HTTP request, or as an unrelated collection of server activities. Neither description reflects what is really happening at the application level.
  • The client engine makes it harder to measure response time. For traditional Web applications, measurement software can reside either on the client machine or on a machine that is close to the server, provided that it can observe the flow of network traffic at the TCP and HTTP levels. Because these protocols are synchronous and predictable, a packet sniffer can read and interpret packet-level data, and infer the user’s experience of response time by tracking HTTP messages and the times of underlying TCP packets and acknowledgments. But the RIA architecture reduces the power of the packet sniffing approach, because the client engine breaks the communication between user and server into two separate cycles operating asynchronously — a foreground (user-to-engine) cycle, and a background (engine-to-server) cycle. Both cycles are important, because neither stands alone; it is their relationship that defines application behavior. But that relationship depends only on the application design, which cannot (in general) be inferred by a measurement tool, especially one that can observe only one of the two cycles. Therefore the most complete RIA measurements can only be obtained using tools that reside on the client and observe both cycles.

Current status of development

RIAs are still in the early stages of development and user adoption.[citation needed] There are a number of restrictions and requirements that remain:

  • Browser adoption: Many RIAs require modern web browsers in order to run. Some RIA platforms depend on advanced JavaScript engines in the browser if they use techniques such as XMLHttpRequest for client-server communication, and DOM Scripting and advanced CSS techniques to enable the rich user interface. Other RIA platforms require the inconvenience of a one-time installation of a plugin, but then have an advantage of running consistently across a wider range of browsers.
  • Web standards: Differences between web browsers can make it difficult to write an RIA that will run across all major browsers. The consistency of the Java platform or other platforms (i.e. Adobe AIR, Curl, Silverlight) using a plugin and installed runtime environment makes this task much simpler.
  • Accessibility concerns: Additional interactivity may require technical approaches that limit applications’ accessibility.
  • User adoption: Users expecting standard web applications may find that some accepted browser functionality (such as the “Back” button) may have somewhat different or even undesired behavior.

RIA Related Topics

RIA with real-time push

Traditionally, web pages have been delivered to the client only when the client requested for it. For every client request, the browser initiates an HTTP connection to the web server, which then returns the data and the connection is closed. The drawback of this approach was that the page displayed was updated only when the user explicitly refreshes the page or moves to a new page. Since transferring entire pages can take a long time, refreshing pages can introduce a long latency.

Demand for localised usage of RIA

With the increasing adoption and improvement in broadband technologies, fewer users experience poor performance caused by remote latency. Furthermore one of the critical reasons for using an RIA is that many developers are looking for a language to serve up desktop applications that is not only desktop OS neutral but also installation and system issue free.

RIA running in the ubiquitous web browser is a potential candidate even when used standalone or over a LAN, with the required webserver functionalities hosted locally.

Client-side functionalities and development tools for RIA needed

With client-side functionalities like Javascript and DHTML, RIA can operate on top of a range of OS and webserver functionalities.

User interface languages

Instead of HTML/XHTML, new user interface markup languages can be used in RIAs. For instance, the Mozilla Foundation‘s XML-based user interface markup language XUL – this could be used in RIAs though it would be restricted to Mozilla-based browsers, since it is not a de facto or de jure standard. The W3C‘s Rich Web Clients Activity[4] has initiated a Web Application Formats Working Group whose mission includes the development of such standards [5]. The original DARPA project at MIT which resulted in the W3C also resulted in the web content/programming language Curl which is now in version 6.0.

RIA’s user interfaces can also become richer through the use of scriptable scalable vector graphics (though not all browsers can render those natively yet) as well as Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL).

Other techniques

RIAs could use XForms to enhance their functionality.

Using XML and XSLT along with some XHTML, CSS and JavaScript can also be used to generate richer client side UI components like data tables that can be resorted locally on the client without going back to the server. Mozilla and Internet Explorer browsers both support this.

The Omnis Web Client is an ActiveX control or Netscape plug-in which can be embedded into an HTML page providing a rich application interface in the end-user’s web browser.

References

  1. ^ Macromedia Flash MX—A next-generation rich client
  2. ^ Living in the RIA World: Blurring the Line Between Web and Desktop Security, 2008 [1]
  3. ^ Rich Internet Applications: Design, Measurement, and Management Challenges, Keynote Systems, 2006 (pdf).
  4. ^ W3C (March 15 2006). “W3C Rich Web Clients“. w3c.org.
  5. ^ W3C (March 15 2006). “Web Application Formats Working Group“. w3c.org.

See also

External links


Tinggalkan Balasan

Isikan data di bawah atau klik salah satu ikon untuk log in:

Logo WordPress.com

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Logout / Ubah )

Gambar Twitter

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Facebook

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Google+

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout / Ubah )

Connecting to %s

%d blogger menyukai ini: