I'm not really interested in attracting the "There's a plug-in for
that" crowd by in large. Perhaps there could be a dumbified layer
that would attract the beginners, with jQuery like syntax. I know
I've seen several 3rd party layers out there, but perhaps one
supported by the Mootools community or developers w/ a seal of
approval. Something that would act as an 'Intro Layer' - so people
who otherwise would be interested in a more robust system, aren't
turned off by all those characters of .addEvent(). ex:
window.ready(function(){ /* Let's do this! */ }); While this reduces
the control and eliminates all things moo, we at least get those
users, who might one day be attracted to the larger abilities of a OO
framework.
I think the real selling point and power of the code base and
community is manifested in the projects that have come out of the
contributors, and community - made with mootools. I mean we have
Oskar w/ jsFiddle/mooshell; Greg Huston w/ Mocha UI (all canvas
windows); Ryan Florance with moo4q; and on and on... It would be
great if the developer world would look at these contributions to the
JS community as possibilities of Mootools (not just effects, but full
scalable environments or work flow enhancements), and see it as a
viable option when developing large projects. A good example of this
is when I showed the Java developers here at work mootools code, vs
jQuery (their adopted framework), they wished they had adopted
mootools, as they extend and create instances of classes every day --
they can understand the importance and flexibility. If Mootools was
"More popular" maybe our guy's lives would be just that much easier --
as they would have a class base, and not just a plugin library.
@Timlmp: I disagree w/ the whole naming thing. There's plenty stupid
names out there that are plenty popular and used in serious
development platforms. Java - a nickname for Coffee, C# - a music
note, PHP,ASP,ColdFusion -- WTF do these even mean? Designers and
Marketers like it when shit moves and is shiny. Where i do see your
point is that we as a community could do a better job in presenting
ourselves towards that demographic (and it looks like Oskar Krawczyk's
got something in the works).
I don't know about all this talk regarding making a more roundie-
cornered site. #1, Rounded corners are dead; I would hate to pull a
Microsoft, and catch up to the outdated. Personally, I would hate to
see mootools turn into the "Plugin Framework", I like that jQuery
provides a bajillion plugins for designers. I simply want mootools to
be more apparent to the application developers as their friend -- the
developers framework -- which it is.
On May 26, 7:53 am, TimeImp <[email protected]> wrote:
> Another thing to think about is the name of the actual JS framework/
> library.
> Eg: a FW/Lib named BigDoor will probably be more remembered than
> something like SmallHandle because when people think door, they think
> wood, timber, building, moving thing. But SmallHandle could mean a
> handle for a door, a ladder or something completely unrelated.
> In this way, I believe that more people are using jQuery because of
> this thinking: it has the word QUERY in there, and that is often
> associated by programming-illiterate people as computer code.
> But mootools [as cool as it sounds] does not have this direct link to
> computer programming. To a person who programs all manner of non-web-
> related things, mootools, when first proposed to them, may sound far-
> fetched and, in some ways, stupid and immature [the name, not the
> framework/library].
>
> It might even cause them to think of Cows or Milk instead of JS code
> and simplifying your life.
>
> So theres a POV from someone who advertises mootools at the workplace
> but gets funny looks until an explanation is told.
