Looks like we have a good consensus around Jquery so far.
I must say that the main arugment for Dojo was its serious. It's a real consistent framework with embedded widgets, not only an API.
All those third parties Jquery's widgets (and Prototypes's) are a bit frightening. On the other hand when you want to upgrade to 1.4
you find that it's not as serious as we thought, and I'm *very disapointed* about that. And as those widgets are open source, it's
not as frightening as it 1st seems. For instance, we use a third party calendar and we have already poked in (for layered lookups)
without issues.
At the time we decided to embed Doo and Prototype some pointed also Jquery with good arguments [1] [2][3]. At this time we decided
that anyway we were not tied to any Ajax frameworks yet.
So yes, +1 for me also, especially now that Sascha wants to tackle it, and I'm
sure we will support his effort!
Thanks guys
Jacques
[1] Yoav Shapira in 2006: http://markmail.org/message/ftw7pjfrzxyxmsuz
[2] Ean in 2007 http://markmail.org/message/jf5qvxblvrbmtvae (and we know now than when there is a dual licensing we can pick the
one we want, here MIT :o)
[3] Ean in 2007 http://markmail.org/message/vqjjtribdrulhbl3. When the serious one is less serious than the other (demo in time).
Dojo is known to have documentation problems also... Found this link http://www.ajaxdaddy.com/demo-dojo-fisheye.html
From: "Atul Vani" <atul.v...@hotwaxmedia.com>
+1
jQuery is simpler, more flexible
and faster to use (coding is about 50% quicker than Prototype one
developer has reported), plus now that its community is really building
the number of plugins and scripts are increasing very fast.
true indeed.
--
Thanks & Regards
Atul Vani
Enterprise Software Developer
HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd.
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
We are the Global Leaders in Apache OFBiz, Google 'ofbiz' and see for yourself.
Sam Hamilton wrote:
It would make a number of my developers very happy if we migrated over
to jQuery. Its been described to me that Dojo is heavy and Prototype as
a library for javascript geeks where as jQuery is simpler, more flexible
and faster to use (coding is about 50% quicker than Prototype one
developer has reported), plus now that its community is really building
the number of plugins and scripts are increasing very fast.
Anyway a few links for people interested
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_JavaScript_frameworks
http://ajaxian.com/archives/prototype-and-jquery-a-code-comparison
Really I think it boils down that we pick one framework and then run
with it. All three are solid choices so then it really comes down to
making coding a pleasure in which case jQuery wins it for me.
Sam
On 09/06/2010 06:03, Scott Gray wrote:
My personal opinion is that adding an additional layer of javascript has more
downsides that it does upsides.
- More code to maintain
- Slightly hackish, multi-parameter strings?
- Another API for users to learn
- Abstracting basic method calls is one thing but what about the more complex
object oriented features of the libraries?
Not to mention that I think the reason that people have a javascript library preference in the first place is because they are
familiar with the APIs, but if we abstract the API away then they don't really gain that benefit.
IMO sometimes trying to be everything to everybody just ends up with us being too complex for anybody and what we really need to
do is just pick a javascript library and stick with it.
Regards
Scott
On 9/06/2010, at 4:42 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
I'm not a JavaScript expert, so I don't have any strong opinions on the choice
of a library. I have some suggestions, however.
I haven't looked at the JavaScript library integration lately, but I recall that it started out with creating "connector code"
in selectall.js. In other words, selectall.js was used as a facade so the third-party library can be swapped out without too
much effort.
That's why JavaScript function arguments are sent as Strings - so the String arguments can be parsed into whatever form the
third-party library needs.
While this effort is underway, it would be nice if we could have a separate file for the library facade. I think selectall.js
was used at the start out of laziness - the file was already there. Now the name of that file doesn't match its contents.
-Adrian
On 6/8/2010 8:17 AM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
Le 08/06/2010 16:12, Sascha Rodekamp a écrit :
Hey guys,
i started the work to update the Dojo libary to the current version 1.4.
And i have to say that it didn't satisfy me to work on every Dojo based
JaveScript for a little version update. It will coast a lot of time to
test
and update all the JavaScript Code. And what we have at the end a new
heavy
Dojo libary which brings a lot of widget but it's hard to extend :-)
So i have another (maybe better idea). Why we didn't set Dojo and
Prototype
as depricated
and starting to use jQuerry. In my optinion jQuerry is a better invest in
the future. There are a lot of Widget/ Plugin's too and it's much lighter
than Dojo.
Instead of spending my time with updating all the Dojo stuff, i could
spend
my time to migrate all Prototype / Dojo based Code to jQuerry.
What do you think?
Cheers
Hi Sascha,
I think we have to make up our minds, and make a choice. Then, go for
it. I had the same probleme as you a while ago, when introducing charting.
Changing to another library is ok with me, but going from one to another
every time is not.
Maybe we should raise a vote, and then make with what the communauty has
decided !
Cheers,
