Talk:JSONP

Past merging with JSON and later reinstatement
Note Wikipedia's JSON entry includes a pre-existing JSONP link so if you chose to delete this entry please note that the referrer JSON entry will need to be edited to remove the internal JSONP link.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.111.22.24 (talk) 20:55, 11 June 2008‎ (UTC)

The topic for this page is sufficiently distinct from JSON as to merit its own page. It had, I guess, originally been a standalone topic, and then in 2008 was merged, I take it. Subsequently, it made less and less sense to keep it in the JSON page, and so in 2010 it was re-instated as an independent topic.

--173.53.20.209 (talk) 03:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Removal of obsolete link
Removed http://www.jsonpexamples.com/ as it does not exist anymore and redirects to a only loosely related website — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.193.182.74 (talk) 13:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Initial definition
The first paragraph says, "JSONP is a solution to this problem..." without saying what the problem is. Complex.confusion (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Convention
The following sentence makes no sense.

'''By convention, the browser provides the name of the callback function as a named query parameter value, typically using the name jsonp or callback as the named query parameter field name, in its request to the server, e.g., ''' How the browser knows the name of callback function is? How the browser knows what the jsonp request is to provide the query parameter?

IMO the sentence should be:

'''By convention, the website has to provide the callback function specified in the query parameter. Typically the parameter is named callback or jsonp.''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.223.81.162 (talk) 07:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this and took the liberty to edit this sentence. Close discussion? Jkohlin (talk) 08:09, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Official Website
I'm not sure I understand how the 'official website' link in the external links section exists. I don't see anything objectionable in its current content, but I also don't see how it can be seen as 'official' other than by virtue of somebody having bought that domain. 149.173.1.35 (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Introduction needed
The article begins with "How it works: To see how this technique works..." There is no introduction to describe what "it" is, or "this technique." There is no definition of JSONP, and no context about why it would be used. I have added Template:Context to request clarification. Mikeharris111 (talk) 14:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)


 * — I have now tagged it with a "Lead missing" template in the hope that it will get someone's attention. It has been over 17 months since you noted the deficiency. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 16:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on JSONP. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://epimorph-pubx1.appspot.com/help.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://htmatters.net/htm/1/2005/07/evaling-JSON.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Corrupted sentence
The first paragraph of the section "Callback name manipulation and reflected file download attack" seems to get cut off. Is it possible to somehow find out the revision that introduced this corruption?--Atr2006 (talk) 12:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Apparently orphaned reference to myResponseFunction
The paragraph "How it works" contains a stray reference to a function myResponseFunction that looks like a leftover from a previous version. I think this should be parseResponse instead, but I'm not entirely sure, and I don't want to mess up an article that I haven't fully understood. --Jan Schreiber (talk) 10:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Maintenance and rating of JavaScript articles
Concerning editing and maintaining JavaScript-related articles...

Collaboration...
If you are interested in collaborating on JavaScript articles or would like to see where you could help, stop by WikiProject JavaScript and feel free to add your name to the participants list. Both editors and programmers are welcome.

Where to list JavaScript articles
We've found over 300 JavaScript-related articles so far. If you come across any others, please add them to that list.

User scripts
The WikiProject is also taking on the organization of the Wikipedia community's user script support pages. If you are interested in helping to organize information on the user scripts (or are curious about what we are up to), let us know!

If you have need for a user script that does not yet exist, or you have a cool idea for a user script or gadget, you can post it at User scripts/Requests. And if you are a JavaScript programmer, that's a great place to find tasks if you are bored.

How to report JavaScript articles in need of attention
If you come across a JavaScript article desperately in need of editor attention, and it's beyond your ability to handle, you can add it to our list of JavaScript-related articles that need attention.

Rating JavaScript articles
At the top of the talk page of most every JavaScript-related article is a WikiProject JavaScript template where you can record the quality class and importance of the article. Doing so will help the community track the stage of completion and watch the highest priority articles more closely.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 01:10, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation
This shares a name with JSR 374 so we're probably going to need some sort of disambiguation. OrangeDog  (τ • ε) 13:13, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Confusion between JSONP and CORS
In the Functionality section, the following sentence appears: "Without support for CORS, an attempt to use the data across domains results in a JavaScript error."

Shouldn't it read "Without support for JSONP, an attempt to use the data across domains results in a JavaScript error."

? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pracatan (talk • contribs) 16:22, 2 November 2020 (UTC)