As you started there, Jörn:
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-ui-dev/browse_thread/thread/9a43ebc6ae185cfa?hl=en
To my point of view, a much nicer place for cookie management to
be! ;-)
Regards,
Diogo
On Aug 23, 2:27 pm, Jörn Zaefferer joern.zaeffe...@googlemail.com
wrote:
jQuery UI
Agreed. Dependency management can solve the problem of identifying the
correct API to use with plugins.
But, as for cookie management on the core, I still don't agree. It
will make the jQuery object grow in size, thus affecting performance,
and this functionality has nothing to do with anything
jQuery UI could be a better place for a cookie component, to live
along other utilities like Positon and Stackfix. Once it makes it into
a stable release, you could use the jQuery UI download builder to
configure your setup.
Jörn
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 6:34 PM, diogobaederdiogobae...@gmail.com
I agree with Mike - I think cookies should be standard.
However, my reason is less because 'users' need cookies regularly, but
because a huge number of plug-ins and widgets do. State-management is
becoming a 'requirement' for many widgets, so having a standard cookie
API *built-in* is superior
This could be managed by a jquery-side dependencies management of
labelized plugins.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
jQuery Development group.
To post to this group, send email to
Agreed. Cookies are rarely used, if compared with other
functionalities that jQuery supports today. Also, as constantly
commented here at this discussion list, it's always good to avoid
putting more funcionalities into the core, if they can (an makes sense
that they) stay outside of it, for us
Hello Miksh,
Most of my projects do not make use of any cookies.
It is just perfect as a plugin.
On Aug 20, 3:07 pm, miksh msha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Cookie is a common and widely used functionality so it is deserved to
be added into jQuery.Utilities rather than to be just a plug-in.
And I've worked on projects that don't need ajax or fx.
I think this falls under the category of wanting a buildable jQuery
where you can disable things you don't need, and enable extra features
that you might want.
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]
True, but jQuery needs at least a standard version that Google can
put on it CDN to please most developers.
It seems that these days developers need ajax and effects. And
cookies? not so much...
On Aug 21, 12:54 am, Daniel Friesen nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com wrote:
And I've worked on projects
