Dojotoolkit <http://dojotoolkit.org/foundation/>is the best I've found, and I've looked at nearly all of them... it also has all of the bullet points you mentioned.. and is extensible. Just as importantly, it has a lot of industry support and will be long lasting (not developed in the corner by 1 or two people). Also works well with the easy to use Prototype+Script.aculo.us libraries (the Script.aculo.us effects library is great), so a developer can use the best of all. Prototype has its benefits, and I like using it as well, and the good news is that you can.
I don't mean to burst your bubble, I'm sure you worked hard and it's probably nice code, and if it works for you, great... but would like to say good luck to those developers trying every js library that pops up (which seems to be some sort of wheel-reinvention virus going around). It can be a huge time sink. I'm personally sticking with those that are very likely to persist -- namely, Dojo and Prototype. imho, I think a lot of developers would be wise to add to foundations that are already solid, with solid support, rather than reinventing the wheel. On 11/29/06, Peter Michaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If you work with Rails but are unhappy with Prototype . . . > > I'm excited about the launch of my new JavaScript library called Fork > at http://forkjavascript.org with the MIT license. Below are snips > from the front page of the Fork site... > > Fork is a JavaScript library with Ajax, Events, DOM manipulation, etc. > Fork is a general purpose library with a few bonus lines in the Ajax > library specifically for use with Ruby on Rails however the library > can be happily used outside of Rails also. > > advantages > > * an aspiration for the highest quality code > * author documentation > * in-browser unit/integration tests > * namespaced code > * does not augment JavaScript built-in prototypes > * does not add a layer of sugar on top of JavaScript to make > writing JavaScript like writing in another language > * Is minimizable with jsmin > * MIT License > > There are many JavaScript libraries out there. Why add another one to > the list? To create a quality library with a liberal license. > > I like Ruby on Rails. I want Rails to have a better JavaScript > library. I (and many others!) think the Rails default Prototype > JavaScript library has many seriously poor design decisions and is > poorly coded. Suggestions to improve the Prototype code sit on the > Rails trac seemingly forever and author Sam Stephenson does not > interact openly with the community of Rails and Prototype users. > Because Prototype does not play well with other JavaScript libraries > it isn't necessarily possible to use Prototype in combination with > Fork. This fact likely will never change because of Prototype's > fundamental design. On the other hand, Fork does plays well with other > respectful libraries. > > I like the Yahoo! UI library. Of the JavaScript libraries I've used it > has the best API. The YUI library has many valuable nuggets of > information about browser bugs and workarounds. The code approach of > YUI suits browser scripting well. However there are more than a few > places in the code where I'm left scratching my head and thinking "why > did they do that?" Maybe that is how every developer looks at another > developers code. The YUI API is the starting point for much of the > Fork API. > > Most libraries seem to develop too quickly. API's are fixed from the > first alpha version and code is not allowed to morph for the early > part of it's life. I like the general debian attitude of careful > growth because the browser execution environment is wildly varied and > deserves a certain degree of conservatism in the JavaScript we send to > it. > > Most JavaScript libraries settle for "good enough" and don't seem to > aspire to the high level of quality to which the Fork library aspires. > By keeping an eye on other JavaScript libraries the good parts can be > brought into the Fork code. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" 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/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
