It's a good question; I think it comes down to Dojo naming idiom
("tapestry", based on Java package names) vs. Prototype naming idiom
("Tapestry", based on Ruby module names).On 5/2/07, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You actually went through the files? =p ..... (i'm so happy the struts people managed to get their little fingers in our dev process) It doesn't matter from a runtime performance perspective (at least for mozilla) , but I think "tapestry" feels better from a js programming perspective...Since really it's serving as a namespace and not a class/object definition. (unless of course the usage is new Tapestry().doLotsOfStuffFromThere() ) On 5/2/07, Andreas Andreou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Andreas Andreou: +1 (binding) > > Sorry for the delay - just went through the files... The only thing i > noticed is > the naming of our global js object... it's 'Tapestry' while in > 4.1.xit's 'tapestry' and > i dont remember what it was in 3... > Anyway, since i can't make up my mind as to how important this is and > since i guess that > js support is still at its infancy, I'll just ask 2 questions :) > - Do we care? > - Do we care now? > > > > > On 5/2/07, liigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > > > -- > Andreas Andreou - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://andyhot.di.uoa.gr > Tapestry / Tacos developer > Open Source / JEE Consulting > -- Jesse Kuhnert Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com
-- Howard M. Lewis Ship TWD Consulting, Inc. Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry Creator, Apache HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
