Ryan Gahl wrote: > Thank you for the insight, Thomas. I think for my purposes, for what > that's worth, I will continue to use proto and manage the lib interop > issues as I have been. At least, anyway, until I have some time to > really put Dojo to the test. Good luck, Martin (and anyone else trying > to do this stuff in an open environment)... it would be interesting to > hear what comes of your situation, please keep us posted. > Actually for my components I probably will sandbox them for the forseeable future but will develop them further along with a disclaimer that there might be issues. Scriptaculous is simply too good to be omitted.
Although Thomas answer as usual is excellent and basically gives a huge insight into this issue (quality stuff like all of his work), it is unsatisfying for the situation we face, in my opinion. The problem is, interfering with basic structures although allowed still is to critical for a base component set in my opinion, and having the iteration problem resolved in a future version of javascript means that we will se support for the fix in all major browsers around 2012 given the current speed of browser development :-( As I said all of this is a non issue in a normal application scope, but in a library scope, I get a bad feeling. _______________________________________________ Rails-spinoffs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
