at least OP got the AJAX part right, it's a better idea than all the on-the-fly generated html (think websites written in php and asp) we're currently sending over the web.
also: learn to love jquery, but don't use it to create "fancy" websites. scan hackernews to stay up to date. dive into html5. write the backend in racket. etc...
Consider this: A pack of wild Niggers.
Savage, slavering Niggers nearing your white home. Trampling your white lawn. Raping your white daughter.
And you can't do shit since they're savages. The Nigger leader grabs your wife and fucks her with his shaman stick.
The primal Niggers finally dominate your household. They watch barbaric shows on TV and you are forced to be their slave.
Such is the downfall of White Man.
>>14
the back-end is the part that responds to javascript requests with some JSON. it can be written in whatever framework you want, but LISP (and now racket) has long been industry standard here at /prog/.
i strongly recommend you create your next website without generating any HTML on the server side, rather use AJAX to load the content from your racket back-end.
>>12,18 have no fucking idea what they're talking about. Implementing websites in pure Javascript is as retarded as disassembling an engine through the exhaust pipe. Even pure Flash websites are better idea.
>>23 You have no idea what they're talking about. They mean to build the page dynamically using static resources, which is not a bad practice (nor is it hard or complicated.) Building from pure JS is not a great idea, but no one has suggested that yet.