After a bit of thought I just thought about one.
A __load and __unload for when the plugin is loaded and unloaded. This
will allow for the plugin to do extension type stuff and be able to unload.
Assuming jQuery.css.addHook and jQuery.css.removeHook for adding and
removing css hooks (an extensibility feature that ideally will get into
jQuery after John does his $.attr and $.curCSS refactor)
(function(jQuery) {
function cssCallback(elem, name, value, force) {
...
}
jQuery.addPlugin('obscureCompat', {
__load: function() {
jQuery.css.addHook(cssCallback);
},
__unload: function() {
jQuery.css.removeHook(cssCallback);
}
});
})(jQuery);
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire)
tres wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, Daniel.
>
> I see what you mean about jQuery.options instead of jQuery.fn.options.
> My reasoning for this, though, is by putting it on .fn you can assign
> different options to different elements instead of setting it globally
> for the plugin. This way options are persistent and can be changed on
> the fly.
>
> I did think about giving the ability to assign a plugin to jQuery and
> not just jQuery.fn, but couldn't find a very graceful way to implement
> it as I just wanted to get the .fn working first. Could add a third,
> boolean, argument called addToFn and default it to true since it is
> the most likely case.
>
> "Magic" methods can also be supported. Say you want to execute a
> function when the object is constructed, or when the options are
> changed. This isn't currently documented, but '__construct' works,and
> others would be fairly easy to implement.
>
> Another idea would be to have an argument in jQuery.addPlugin to pass
> in an object of default options which would automatically apply
> options to the passed objects using jQuery.fn.options.
>
> That said, I'm trying to keep a good balance of simplicity and
> extensibility, so more features isn't necessarily the right answer.
>
> Anybody have anymore ideas or want to collaborate?
>
> Thanks,
> -Trey
>
>
>
> On Mar 5, 1:34 pm, Daniel Friesen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I think it could do with the ability to handle methods on jQuery itself
>> instead of being limited to just jQuery.fn, perhaps a second
>> object/function to addPlugin;
>>
>> Likewise I'd prefer jQuery.options over jQuery.fn.options;
>>
>> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://nadir-seen-fire.com]
>> -Nadir-Point & Wiki-Tools (http://nadir-point.com) (http://wiki-tools.com)
>> -MonkeyScript (http://monkeyscript.org)
>> -Animepedia (http://anime.wikia.com)
>> -Narutopedia (http://naruto.wikia.com)
>> -Soul Eater Wiki (http://souleater.wikia.com)
>>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> There has been a lot of activity about plugin authoring and how it can
>>> be more structured and extensible. I've posted a couple of comments on
>>> some threads and sent an email to John, but I thought I'd create a new
>>> thread since I haven't had any feedback yet. John, I understand you
>>> probably get a lot of email and are very busy.
>>>
>>> I've written a plugin that I'd like to get feedback on from you guys.
>>> It's still evolving, but should be stable in what it currently is
>>> designed to do and I have found it invaluable when authoring larger,
>>> more advanced plugins. It would be nice to see similar functionality
>>> built into jQuery as I think others would also find it useful.
>>>
>>> Link:http://plugins.jquery.com/project/plugin-authoring
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Trey
>>>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
