RE: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-12 Thread Sascha Kiefer
I should put more work into HTML::Prototype.--skĀ  My preferred framework is prototype + scriptaculous. Used to be quite hermetic, but now there is good documentation thanks to http://www.sergiopereira.com/articles/prototype.js.html, and even a PDF small book by Oreilly. In addition the "p

[Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-12 Thread Dami Laurent \(PJ\)
My preferred framework is prototype + scriptaculous. Used to be quite hermetic, but now there is good documentation thanks to http://www.sergiopereira.com/articles/prototype.js.html, and even a PDF small book by Oreilly. In addition the "prototype window" widget at http://prototype-window.xilinus.

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread apv
On Thursday, Jan 11, 2007, at 04:09 US/Pacific, Chisel Wright wrote: On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:53:50AM +, Toby Corkindale wrote: Downsides: Can get quite slow to load pages. It only seems to happen with one page, so it might be dojo and existing jscript not playing well together - who know

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Victor Igumnov
On Jan 11, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Matt S Trout wrote: On 9 Jan 2007, at 21:22, Mesdaq, Ali wrote: Hello everyone new to the list and new to catalyst in general. I am still trying to figure out best ways of using it in our environment with least amount of pain. To do that I am trying to plan i

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Matt S Trout
On 9 Jan 2007, at 21:22, Mesdaq, Ali wrote: Hello everyone new to the list and new to catalyst in general. I am still trying to figure out best ways of using it in our environment with least amount of pain. To do that I am trying to plan it out before I start really getting my hands dirty.

Re: (off-topic) Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Matt S Trout
On 11 Jan 2007, at 15:40, Toby Corkindale wrote: Carl Franks wrote: On 11/01/07, Toby Corkindale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Attempts to correct said documentation by me failed, as you need to sign a disclosure saying your contributions are owned by the Dojo Foundation (so they can pub

Re: (off-topic) Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Jonathan Rockway
Toby Corkindale wrote: > CLA itself.. I just couldn't be > bothered to actually go through with the procedure to sign it. > > (I only found out after I submitted stuff, so it's wasted time, but I > didn't want to waste any more either.) Why bother contributing back if it's too hard? Make a svk m

Re: (off-topic) Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Toby Corkindale
Carl Franks wrote: On 11/01/07, Toby Corkindale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Attempts to correct said documentation by me failed, as you need to sign a disclosure saying your contributions are owned by the Dojo Foundation (so they can publish a book later) ... The CLA ( http://dojotoolkit.or

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Toby Corkindale
Chisel Wright wrote: On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:53:50AM +, Toby Corkindale wrote: Downsides: Can get quite slow to load pages. Yeah, I seem to have been caught out by that. I really like dojo, and I've not seen any problems with it ... until some changes were rolled out to a staging server

(off-topic) Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Carl Franks
On 11/01/07, Toby Corkindale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Attempts to correct said documentation by me failed, as you need to sign a disclosure saying your contributions are owned by the Dojo Foundation (so they can publish a book later) ... The CLA ( http://dojotoolkit.org/icla.txt ) grants

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Chisel Wright
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:53:50AM +, Toby Corkindale wrote: > Downsides: Can get quite slow to load pages. Yeah, I seem to have been caught out by that. I really like dojo, and I've not seen any problems with it ... until some changes were rolled out to a staging server. Now the page(s) takes

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-11 Thread Toby Corkindale
Mesdaq, Ali wrote: Hello everyone new to the list and new to catalyst in general. I am still trying to figure out best ways of using it in our environment with least amount of pain. To do that I am trying to plan it out before I start really getting my hands dirty. My question is what is everyon

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-10 Thread Michele Beltrame
Hello all! I just tried Protoype and jQuery as of now, and I'm definitely for the second: it's small, fast, simple, provides a powerful syntax and has quite a lot of plug-ins. I'm curious to try Yahoo Framework, that'll happen when I have some time... ;) Michele. -- Michele Beltrame http:

RE: [BULK] - Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-10 Thread Mesdaq, Ali
http://www.WebsenseSecurityLabs.com -- -Original Message- From: John Napiorkowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 1:39 PM To: The elegant MVC web framework Subject: [BULK] - Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework --- "Mesdaq, Ali" &l

Re: [Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-09 Thread John Napiorkowski
--- "Mesdaq, Ali" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello everyone new to the list and new to catalyst > in general. I am > still trying to figure out best ways of using it in > our environment with > least amount of pain. To do that I am trying to plan > it out before I > start really getting my hand

[Catalyst] Preferred Ajax framework

2007-01-09 Thread Mesdaq, Ali
Hello everyone new to the list and new to catalyst in general. I am still trying to figure out best ways of using it in our environment with least amount of pain. To do that I am trying to plan it out before I start really getting my hands dirty. My question is what is everyone's preferred Ajax fr