Good morning guys, sounds good to me. I will now start implementing a example widget based onjQuery and provide a patch asap. So erveryone can see how jQuery works.
Have a nice day. Sascha 2010/6/9 Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> > 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, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> > > -- Sascha Rodekamp Lynx-Consulting GmbH Johanniskirchplatz 6 D-33615 Bielefeld http://www.lynx.de
