Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Rails
Yehuda, I'm looking forward to jQuery on Rails! 1) Are you using Rails? All my server-side work is in Rails. 3) Would you prefer an approach that generated JS by writing Ruby helpers that generated jQuery code, or an approach that made is easier to link up existing jQuery code into Rails? I think the former (helpers generating jQ code) -- although I'm not sure exactly what the latter would look like. If you go the helpers route, they should avoid dumping JS inline in the HTML (obviously, this is the beef with the standard Rails JS helpers). It would be nice if the helpers could write all the JS into the header of your document, or into an external JS file. It looks like the UJS plugin has solved some of these problems already, so it might serve as a useful point of reference. One of the other good things they've done is provided an easy migration path to switch to UJS. 4) If you've used jQuery with Rails, what issues have you run into You definitely pay a price in terms of development time. There has been a lot of effort implementing Prototype/scriptaculous support in Rails -- including RJS templates -- and you throw that all away when you go the jQuery route (my applications have been *all* jQ or *all* proto/scriptaculous -- I've never mixed the two) 5) If you've used jQuery with Rails before, what type of application (size, scope, etc.) was it? Two Rails apps using exclusively jQ: - hotspotr.com is a map-based app with ratings and reviews. Not huge, but respectable. - http://termmap.earthcode.com/build/web20 is smal, but with more JS. It's basically one page, with a lot of JS interaction packed into it. Thanks for your work on this, Andre -- Andre Lewis Author, Google Maps Applications with Rails and Ajax http://www.amazon.com/dp/1590597877/ My blog: http://earthcode.com ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery 1.1 by the end of Nov
I think that when newcomers find JQ, their default experience should pretty inclusive, i.e., definitely Ajax and Effects. That way, people won't be frustrated by the I saw it in the API but can't get it to work factor, and will be more likely to continue on to discover more jQuery goodness. How about something like this for the download page. Offer the two ends of the spectrum, and awareness that jQuery scales up and down. I'm making the specifics up, but you get the idea:== Getting Started? == Download jQuery Full Version, includes Ajax, Effects, etc . . . Size: 21K. You can always remove components you don't need later to make the _javascript_ smaller!== Need a lightweight, ninja-fast DOM and Events toolkit? == Download jQuery Core. Size: 10K== Need something more or less? ==jQuery scales up and down with your needs. You can selectively add or remove components (Form Serializer, etc.), and leverage a thriving plugin community. Learn more here. ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
[jQuery] contextMenu
I was upgrading one of my older projects today (from jQuery rev 29 !), and noticed that event.contextMenu went away. It looks like it was dropped at 1.0 -- is there a reason it was dropped?Thanks,Andre ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] Logging for development?
I created a (non-jQuery-specific) logger called JSLog: http://earthcode.com/blog/2005/12/jslog.htmlYou might also be interested in Leave logging statements in your production code: http://earthcode.com/blog/2005/12/jslog_production.htmlIt's been a while since I've touched JSLog, but if there's interest, I can probably shrink the code by creating a jQuery-specific version. Andre ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] Global AJAX handlers
I think the global responders should be attached to the jQuery object rather than to a DOM element. That said, it's very useful to be able to override the global responders for individual requests -- as Klaus points out, there are often XHR requests that don't merit the user's attention.
AndreOn 9/24/06, Klaus Hartl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörn Zaefferer schrieb: Hi folks, which of the following examples of global ajax handlers make more sense and are easier to understand? $(#msg).ajaxSuccess(function(){
$(this).append(liSuccessful Request!/li); }); or $.ajaxSuccess(function(){ $(#msg).append(liSuccessful Request!/li);
}); With chaining: $(#msg).ajaxStart(function(){ $(this).show(); }).ajaxStop(function() {$(this).hide(); }); or var msg = $('#msg');
$.ajaxStart(function() { msg.show(); }); $.ajaxStop(function() { msg.hide(); }); Your opinion is appreciated. -- Jörn
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
[jQuery] Production Rails site using jQuery
There's been a lot of discussion on jQuery for Rails development, especially with wycats' post on the blog. I've had my wifi cafes site (http://wifi.earthcode.com) up for a month or so running on Rails + jQuery. Most of the jQuery code on Wifi is in the Google maps interaction (adding a cafe particularly), with a bit in the CSS ratings system. I can definitely say it's more work to develop on Rails with jQ vs. prototype. And, a lot of Rails programmers don't want to step out of the Ruby environment and dig into _javascript_. Andre-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]My tech blog: http://earthcode.comWifi cafes: http://wifi.earthcode.com ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
