> This was the idea behind my Firefox extension which is basically a
> Greasemonkey script that utilises a local copy of jQuery, rather than
> accessing a remote version.
>
> The obvious benefits include file download times.

I know how to develop Greasemonkey scripts, but not Firefox  
extensions... :(


> Blair Mitchelmore-2 wrote:
>>
>> I would guess that the best way would be to pack the jQuery source  
>> into
>> the greasemonkey xpi and access it using the chrome URI interface
>> somehow. I have very limited experience with firefox extensions  
>> but that
>> would seem to be the best way in terms of bandwidth and in terms of
>> usability (you wouldn't need to add a dynamic script load to every  
>> page
>> load just to use jQuery in your user scripts)
>>
>> -blair
>>
>> Nicolas Hoizey wrote:
>>> Hello Joan,
>>>
>>>> Yes, I remember the threads talking about this, and I was curious
>>>> about it. After some days I figured out how to load jQuery and
>>>> simply make it work giving jQuery power to my userscripts in
>>>> Greasemonkey.
>>>> Here is the url, check it out.
>>>> http://joanpiedra.com/jquery/greasemonkey/
>>>
>>> Your solution is better than the first I have been trying, but it
>>> still gets the jQuery source directly from jquery.com, which is not
>>> really nice. If the greasemonkey script gains a lot of users, and is
>>> executed on a lot of pages, the load on jquery.com may become
>>> noticeable.
>>>
>>> John, am I right, or do you authorize such bandwidth "abuse"?
>>>
>>>
>>> -Nicolas
>>>
>>>> On 1/30/07, Nicolas Hoizey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I want to improve some of my Greasemonkey scripts by using jQuery
>>>> instead of "traditionnal" JS.
>>>>
>>>> I tried to load the library during execution[1] and it didn't  
>>>> work as
>>>> intended. It was loaded from jquery.com, so I didn't want it  
>>>> anyway.
>>>> I can't load it from my host either.
>>>>
>>>> I found a way to integrate the compact version of jQuery  
>>>> directly in
>>>> my script[2], but it is an old release, and I can't find how to do
>>>> the same with current 1.1.1 release. The author (SunSean) just said
>>>> he had "slightly edited [jQuery] for greasemonkey" without  
>>>> explaining
>>>> what he did change, and Firebug tells me "Component is not  
>>>> available".
>>>>
>>>> Any idea on how to do it?
>>>>
>>>> Here is my current version with the old jQuery embedded: <http://
>>>> userscripts.org/scripts/show/2243>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] <http://weblogs.asp.net/dstone/archive/2006/07/23/
>>>> jQueryMonkey.aspx>
>>>> [2] < http://jquery.com/pipermail/discuss_jquery.com/2006-June/
>>>> 006355.html>
>>>>
>>>> -Nicolas
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Nicolas "Brush" HOIZEY
>>>> Clever Age   : http://www.clever-age.com/
>>>> Gastero Prod : http://www.gasteroprod.com/
>>>> Photos : http://www.flickr.com/gp/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/M1c002
>>>> phpHeaven    : http://www.phpheaven.net/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Joan Piedra || Frontend webdeveloper
>>>> http://joanpiedra.com/
>>>
>>> -Nicolas
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jQuery mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://jquery.com/discuss/
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Embedding- 
> jQuery-in-a-Greasemonkey-script-tf3142897.html#a8725414
> Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jQuery mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://jquery.com/discuss/



-Nicolas

-- 
Nicolas "Brush" HOIZEY
Clever Age   : http://www.clever-age.com/
Gastero Prod : http://www.gasteroprod.com/
Photos : http://www.flickr.com/gp/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/M1c002
phpHeaven    : http://www.phpheaven.net/




_______________________________________________
jQuery mailing list
[email protected]
http://jquery.com/discuss/

Reply via email to