Speaking for my company, sometimes we are forced to use jQuery for some things. We try to do as much as possible with Ajax.framework (prototype) but some things are simply not feasible without jQuery. We generally have use the two mixed, which is sometimes a source for headaches. A nice thing would be to have a port of the prototype Ajax.framework to jQuery but that's way beyond our area of expertise, I can't even say if it's feasible.
Matteo On 07/feb/2013, at 17:23, Pascal Robert <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 2013-02-07 à 11:21, Musall Maik <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> >> Am 07.02.2013 um 16:58 schrieb Pascal Robert <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> Le 2013-02-07 à 10:44, Johann Werner <[email protected]> a écrit : >>> >>>> >>>> Am 07.02.2013 um 16:12 schrieb James Cicenia <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> I concur... a strong integration of WO with CoreData and Syncing, would >>>>> be a really nice marketing hook too. Which could translate into more >>>>> members! >>>>> >>>>> And yes, jQuery does have the momentum in the AJAX world. >>>> >>>> I see jQuery as an important option for Wonder though I am not sure if its >>>> the best way to have a separate AjaxPrototype, AjaxJQuery, AjaxMooTools, … >>>> framework which would make maintenance a nightmare if you want to keep >>>> those feature equal. If I remember correctly long time ago the idea to >>>> make some sort of Javascript API wrapper was already discussed / proposed >>>> on the list to have only one single Ajax framework and being able choose >>>> if you want to use prototype, jQuery or any other supported JS library. >>>> I already played with the thought to do some test code in that direction >>>> though had not enough time yet. What do you think, is that something the >>>> we should realize or does the community want a complete jQuery replacement >>>> of the prototype framework? >>> >>> I'm curious about this too, because looking at the surveys, looks like most >>> people use both jQuery and the Ajax framework: >>> >>> Ajax framework from Wonder 81% >>> jQuery 69% >>> >>> Last year: >>> >>> Ajax framework from Wonder 69% >>> jQuery 47% >> >> The survey was bit biased because it listed jQuery specifically but not moo >> tools. > > This is why we have a "Other" option, and two organizations listed MooTools > in "other". > >> I'm with Johann. We should have one server-side framework that supports the >> main JS libs, or we'll be seeing more frameworks eventually make their way >> into the "Archive" attic ;-) >> >> Maik >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. >> Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) >> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: >> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/probert%40macti.ca >> >> This email sent to [email protected] > > > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mcentro%40altera.it > > This email sent to [email protected] _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
