That would get the teen crowd for sure! :)
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of jiggliemon
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 1:51 PM
To: MooTools Users
Subject: [Moo] Re: Why is Mootools dwindling? Haven't they heard about
Slick?
I propose we take it to a-whole-nother level.
/*
* mootools-on-ice.js
*/
Element.implement({
awesomeize: function(prop,val){
this.tween(prop,val);
return this;
},
clickify:function(fn){
this.addEvent('click',fn);
return this;
}
});
On May 26, 10:17 am, Ryan Florence <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Perhaps there could be a dumbified layer
> > that would attract the beginners, with jQuery like syntax.
>
> It's called Element.
>
> The new docs will emphasize it at the top instead of the bottom.
>
> $('el').tween('height', 100);
>
> $('#el').animate('height', 100);
>
> Element and jQuery are for the most party search and replaceable.
>
> On May 26, 2010, at 10:58 AM, jiggliemon wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'm not really interested in attracting the "There's a plug-in for
> > that" crowd by in large. Perhaps there could be a dumbified layer
> > that would attract the beginners, with jQuery like syntax. I know
> > I've seen several 3rd party layers out there, but perhaps one
> > supported by the Mootools community or developers w/ a seal of
> > approval. Something that would act as an 'Intro Layer' - so people
> > who otherwise would be interested in a more robust system, aren't
> > turned off by all those characters of .addEvent(). ex:
> > window.ready(function(){ /* Let's do this! */ }); While this reduces
> > the control and eliminates all things moo, we at least get those
> > users, who might one day be attracted to the larger abilities of a OO
> > framework.
>
> > I think the real selling point and power of the code base and
> > community is manifested in the projects that have come out of the
> > contributors, and community - made with mootools. I mean we have
> > Oskar w/ jsFiddle/mooshell; Greg Huston w/ Mocha UI (all canvas
> > windows); Ryan Florance with moo4q; and on and on... It would be
> > great if the developer world would look at these contributions to the
> > JS community as possibilities of Mootools (not just effects, but full
> > scalable environments or work flow enhancements), and see it as a
> > viable option when developing large projects. A good example of this
> > is when I showed the Java developers here at work mootools code, vs
> > jQuery (their adopted framework), they wished they had adopted
> > mootools, as they extend and create instances of classes every day --
> > they can understand the importance and flexibility. If Mootools was
> > "More popular" maybe our guy's lives would be just that much easier --
> > as they would have a class base, and not just a plugin library.
>
> > @Timlmp: I disagree w/ the whole naming thing. There's plenty stupid
> > names out there that are plenty popular and used in serious
> > development platforms. Java - a nickname for Coffee, C# - a music
> > note, PHP,ASP,ColdFusion -- WTF do these even mean? Designers and
> > Marketers like it when shit moves and is shiny. Where i do see your
> > point is that we as a community could do a better job in presenting
> > ourselves towards that demographic (and it looks like Oskar Krawczyk's
> > got something in the works).
>
> > I don't know about all this talk regarding making a more roundie-
> > cornered site. #1, Rounded corners are dead; I would hate to pull a
> > Microsoft, and catch up to the outdated. Personally, I would hate to
> > see mootools turn into the "Plugin Framework", I like that jQuery
> > provides a bajillion plugins for designers. I simply want mootools to
> > be more apparent to the application developers as their friend -- the
> > developers framework -- which it is.
>
> > On May 26, 7:53 am, TimeImp <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Another thing to think about is the name of the actual JS framework/
> >> library.
> >> Eg: a FW/Lib named BigDoor will probably be more remembered than
> >> something like SmallHandle because when people think door, they think
> >> wood, timber, building, moving thing. But SmallHandle could mean a
> >> handle for a door, a ladder or something completely unrelated.
> >> In this way, I believe that more people are using jQuery because of
> >> this thinking: it has the word QUERY in there, and that is often
> >> associated by programming-illiterate people as computer code.
> >> But mootools [as cool as it sounds] does not have this direct link to
> >> computer programming. To a person who programs all manner of non-web-
> >> related things, mootools, when first proposed to them, may sound far-
> >> fetched and, in some ways, stupid and immature [the name, not the
> >> framework/library].
>
> >> It might even cause them to think of Cows or Milk instead of JS code
> >> and simplifying your life.
>
> >> So theres a POV from someone who advertises mootools at the workplace
> >> but gets funny looks until an explanation is told.
