Hey guys,
On the topic of namespacing, I have also found 'pollution' of the core
a problem. I recently worked for a company that had over 30 plugins
and I did run in to conflicting problems, especially with jQuery UI,
which is one reason I stay away from it amongst others.
If you are interested I've created a way to add namespacing to jQuery
whilst still using 'this' as DOM array. Currently, it only goes 1
level deep, but I have found it extremely usefull. Instead of:
$('div').dialog('open');
you could go:
$('div').dialog().open();
Check the latest of this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev/browse_thread/thread/664cb89b43ccb92c
--
Trey
On May 8, 10:20 am, chris thatcher <thatcher.christop...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> blah my keyboard had is heavy and i hit send before i meant to. continuing
> for roddy inline
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:06 PM, chris thatcher <
>
>
>
> thatcher.christop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > roddy, nice to meet you. reponse is inline
>
> > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:31 PM, kiusau <kiu...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >> QUESTION ONE: When is use of the jQuery prototype object appropriate,
> >> and when is it not?
>
> > i am not a jquery core or ui developer so this response must be taken with
> > a grain of salt.
>
> > it is appropriate for the static jQuery namespace when the function is
> > either 'generally useful' or 'highly reusable in instance context where the
> > context is a dom node'
>
> > for the latter case ('highly reusable in instance context where the context
> > is a dom node') i am way over-specific; however, the jquery core has
> > basically cornered this market. the core dev team is highly aware of basic
> > issues and most everything you could think of is already there.
>
> > 'polluting' the core namespace is the responsiblity of plugins. the term
> > 'pollution' is used to mean only that every name you put on the namespace
> > has the probability of conflicting in the future if it doesn't already
> > exist.
>
> > if you make sure a name doesn't already exist on the jquery namespace, and
> > if you think the new property (which may be a function, object, array,
> > simple type, or a hetergeneous object/array/function jquery-like collection)
> > is useful enough to be in the core library, please feel free to ask the
> > jquery-dev list
>
> the chances are they will point to a thread that exists already and/or they
> will question the concept by usually
> 1) pointing to an existing solution
> 2) providing context for why the question is still open
> 3) ask you to create a ticket to fix it
> 4) tell you it's a perfect use of the plug-in architecture an point you to a
> great reernce for how to publish it correctly
>
>
>
> >> BACKGROUND: I am still trying very hard to identify the error that is
> >> prohibiting me from incorporating a jQuery plug-in into my site in a
> >> manner similar to the way that the author of the plug-in has
> >> incorporated it into his. Although I have sought consultation with
> >> the author, he appears uninterested in working with me.
>
> > post a link. you did below and i'm just about to look at it; however, it
>
> 'should' be the first thing you post. reduce the problem to a simple
> example and post the url. the community will help you in most cases in just
> a few minutes. on the other hand if you post something analogous to 'I
> HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM!!! CAN YOU HELP??? NOW!!!
> 2...@#$%!#&#$%&%^%$$*$...@#%257
>
> well chances are
>
> no
>
> the reason is we need you to help us help you. if you want the most basic
> question answered please use this list:
> jquery-ment...@googlegroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
> >> My still fledgling knowledge of jQuery tells me that the author of the
> >> plug-in and my implementation of his plug-in are constructed
> >> differently. Whereas I use jQuery's prototype property to reference
> >> my method and then assign my method anonymously to my HTML document as
> >> follows: $().myJQMethod(). The author of the plug-in does something
> >> very different.
>
> >> Please compare the isolated code that I have extracted from the
> >> author's plug-in and my implementation of it. Links to the source
> >> pages have been included.
>
> >> CONSTRUCT A (The jQ_Impromptu Plug-In):
>
> >> (function($) {
> >> $.prompt = function(message, options) {
> >> })(jQuery);
>
> >> SOURCE:
> >>http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/Imagine_Prototype/JavaScript/jQ_I...
>
> >> CONSTRUCT B (My implementation of the jQ_Impromptu Plug-In)
>
> >> (function($) {
> >> $.fn.getBrowserInformation = function() {
> >> })(jQuery);
>
> >> SOURCE:
> >>http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/Imagine_Prototype/JavaScript/jQ_b...
>
> >> QUESTION TWO: Although I am able to implement the author's method, it
> >> is not performing as it should. When the alert box appears with focus
> >> the hosting HTML page is suppose to show through with dimmed opacity.
> >> My implementation does not achieve this effect. Firebug has alerted
> >> to me to the following breakpoint, but I am poorly unable to interpret
> >> it.
>
> >> jQuery.cache[ id ][ name ] :
>
> >> Could someone help?
>
> >> SOURCE HTML:
> >>http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/Imagine_Prototype/Content/
>
> >> Roddy
>
> > --
> > Christopher Thatcher
>
> --
> Christopher Thatcher
