I'm now thinking about another possibility : letting the actual extensions (documents with JavaScriptExtensions objects) letting declare their libraries dependencies. We could create a new class for this, which would have the path (absolute in case the file is distant, or name of the file if it's on the FS) as a property. This way an extension can declare as many deps as it needs.
This is not necessary incompatible with the proposition below, we could have both. Jerome. Jerome Velociter wrote: > Hello, > > Following the open question #1 here > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/SkinExtensions#HUsage > > " > Open question 1: Should $jsx.useFile("filename.js") work for files > located on the disk? This allows the same pull process to be used with > files located in the skin, without requiring SX documents and objects. > I'd say yes. Then, what should the URL look like? > /xwiki/bin/jsx/skins/albatross/somestyle.css is OK? > " > > I would like to propose to go even further, and to allow injection of > script tags referring libraries on the cloud or on a different server > using the jsx plugin. This would allow to not have users writing scripts > tags in the body of the document to add a library. > > I would see something like : > > $jsx.use("http://maps.google.com/maps?file=api&v=2&key=XXX";) > > or > > $jsx.useFile("http://maps.google.com/maps?file=api&v=2&key=XXX";) > > What do you think ? > > Regards, > Jerome. > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
