This brings another issue to my mind. What we should do with the sandbox components. IMO they should be clearly separated of the tomahawk ones. I would do another war (like it is currently) for this, or, if not, a new section of the examples with warnings, alerts, use-at-your-own-risks, etc regarding the possible unstability of the sandbox components. BTW, I've seen that the ajaxInputSuggest example uses the prefix 's' for the sandbox taglib. For me, it is OK, we should warn to everybody using sandbox components in its applications that when a sandbox component goes to tomahawk the prefix will change from 's' to 'x'. I've seen that Sean has used the prefix 'x' for the inputSuggest example, as it is alone in the page and there are no tomahawk components in the example. But, if we did this we could not put both sandbox and tomahawk components in the same page...
Regards, Bruno 2005/7/8, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > +1 > > 2005/7/8, Grant Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > +1 for consolidation, yet with separate areas for non-jsCookMenu-cluttered > > stuff. > > > > > > Sean Schofield wrote: > > Can we get a few more +1's for this? > > > > sean > > > > On 7/7/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > yes now the cobwebs are clearing... > > > > if we get agreement I'd be up for getting rid of standard and making > > a JSCookMenu example. > > > > TTFN, > > > > -bd- > > > > On Jul 7, 2005, at 2:20 PM, Sean Schofield wrote: > > > > > > > > A little background ... > > > > I created the simple examples because they had way less HTML > > cluttering them up because they were not running inside of menus, etc. > > We still needed an example that showed off JSCookMenu so people > > argued that we should keep the old examples around for this purpose. > > > > When I did the reorg, I created an svn:external for the src in simple > > so that it points to the standard. So the source code is *exactly* > > the same. > > > > I would like to stop maintaining the two sets of examples as you > > propose. When we create a new component nobody is going to want to > > add it to both examples and so they will get hopelessly out of sync > > over time. I would suggest dropping standard examples and adding a > > few fancy JSCookMenu examples, etc. to simple (that show off what > > standard was trying to do.) That will take a little bit of time so we > > need a volunteer (if we can get agreement.) > > > > sean > > > > On 7/7/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > It appears that the code in examples/standard and the code in simple/ > > standard is the same. Any objections to getting rid of one or the > > other? > > > > TTFN, > > > > -bd- > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > >
