Thanks guys for the feedback.
Sanford, I agree with the java-style namespacing in theory, but things
become a bit too verbose (in my option) given something like this:
<div data-behavior="com.quandis.epatrick.Paginate" data-
com.quandis.epatrick.Paginate-options="{...}"/>
For now, I'll stick with our toolset abbreviation, "qbo", as a
namespace. Part of my goal is to allow third parties to mix MooTools,
jQuery, YUI and our stuff, so an "unofficial OID" should meet that
goal.
It would be nice to have the wider javascript community leverage a
namespacing abbreviation convention along the lines of XML, and build
such understanding into a javascript "minifier"(not the right word
here) along these lines:
// namespace moo = "net.mootools";
// namespace $ = "com.jquery";
// namespace qbo = "com.quandis";
qbo = {};
// create my stufff using this namespace
// call minifier.expand("qbo", "com.quandis");
// publish for the world
// somebody wants to call my stuff "weird"
// call minifier.collapse("com.quandis", "weird");
Of course, if I want that then I need to get off my butt and write
it. Which I probably won't do, since the likelihood of adoption is
pretty low :-)
Ah well,
Eric
On Sep 14, 7:15 pm, Aaron Newton <aa...@iminta.com> wrote:
> You can always register your filter twice. A "global" name ("Tabs") and a
> namespaced name ("MyProject.Tabs"). There's no cost to adding more.
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Sanford Whiteman <
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> sa...@cypressintegrated.com> wrote:
> > I've thrown out the idea before that people register real OIDs or use Java
> > package-style (com.quantis.epatrick.behaviors....) names. I know it sounds
> > crazy, but there's nothing else self-describing and guaranteed to work
> > globally (as long as everyone is using the same method, of course).
