Hi Klaus, > Isn't it a bit dangerous to alter jQuery's core in a plugin?
I hear what you're saying. I ended up using "serialize" partially based on this note from John: > I think form.js's .serialize() should supercede the serialize() in > ajax.js. It's all around a better plugin. If we're serious about > merging jQuery and the form plugin, then the better one should go > first. and also because I thought that was the group consensus. One question I posed back then was, "Why would you want to serialize form elements in a way that does not correctly utilize the element state?" In other words, why submit controls that are not "successful"[1]? I guess your on-the-fly validation falls into that category. > jQuerys serialize is a more general tool for serialization, I think. I guess. It's either a "more general" tool or a "broken" tool. :-) It's one of those methods that requires a "buyer beware" sign. I have no problem changing the form plugin's serialize method to formSerialize. Anyone disagree with doing so? Mike [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#successful-controls _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
