FYI, a Script Library Community Group (Cc'ed) was formed some time ago
and it may have some similar interest(s)
<http://www.w3.org/community/scriptlib/> (although their mail list
archive indicates the CG isn't very active).
Perhaps someone in that CG has some comments on Yehuda' email.
-AB
P.S. Yehuda's email archive is
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012AprJun/0762.html>
On 5/16/12 10:13 PM, ext Ojan Vafai wrote:
In principle, I agree with this as a valid goal. It's one among many
though, so the devil is in the details of each specific proposal to
balance out this goal with others (e.g. keeping the platform
consistent). I'd love to see your list of proposals of what it would
take to considerably shrink jQuery.
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Yehuda Katz <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
In the past year or so, I've participated in a number of threads
that were implicitly about adding features to browsers that would
shrink the size of existing libraries.
Inevitably, those discussions end up litigating whether making it
easier for jQuery (or some other library) to do the task is a good
idea in the first place.
While those discussions are extremely useful, I feel it would be
useful for a group to focus on proposals that would shrink the
size of existing libraries with the implicit assumption that it
was a good idea.
From some basic experimentation I've personally done with the
jQuery codebase, I feel that such a group could rather quickly
identify enough areas to make a much smaller version of jQuery
that ran on modern browsers plausible. I also think that having
data to support or refute that assertion would be useful, as it's
often made casually in meta-discussions.
If there is a strong reason that people feel that a focused effort
to identify ways to shrink existing popular libraries in new
browsers would be a bad idea, I'd be very interested to hear it.
Thanks so much for your consideration,
Yehuda Katz
jQuery Foundation
(ph) 718.877.1325 <tel:718.877.1325>
