Well bad-practice is the fact that currently each form element generates its own javascript code.
If there were a bunch of zf jQuery plugins that are integrated and those are used through classes then the extension might be more helpful, but this requires a complete rewrite and stricter focus on separation of JS and PHP, where form elements only render additional classes and these are hooked into by general selectors on the jQuery side. I doubt that just the bootstrapping enabling/disabling and such is a helpful procedure, it requires a 600 loc php script just to inject 2 lines of html code into the view based on some variables. In any case from a deployment perspective it is worse to ship each javascript code rqeuired of a single page in the page rather than shipping one application wide javascript file that is minified and delivered gzipped (prefered approach!). The first approach is what ZendX jQuery plugin currently does and there is just no way to go from that approach to a javascript based file approach without starting from the beginning. On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:39:39 -0330, Adam Lundrigan <[email protected]> wrote: > My two cents say that ZendX_Jquery should remain a part of ZF. For me, > "some users may use it incorrectly" is not a valid reason to drop it. The > compoment does have a few good things going for it, as previous messages > have attested to. I find the view integration and form elements very > helpful, and use them in most - if not all - of my projects. Sure, it's > possible that the component might allow people to fall into bad practices, > but I don't think it's the only component that could be accused of that. > > Perhaps we could provide a best practices user guide to help keep users > from > falling into the aforementioned traps when using this component? I would > be > willing to write the guide, with input from the community, and even take > over maintenance of this component if necessary. > > We could also look at restructuring the component to make it more difficult > to use incorrectly...or easier to use correctly...or both. > > - Adam Lundrigan > [email protected] > > Sent from my Google Nexus One > On Jan 18, 2011 10:18 AM, "Jurian Sluiman" <[email protected]> > wrote:
