Mackram wrote:
> 1- I only defined jquery because I though you said you want it to be > the default one. Defining prototype is easy (I already tested it with > both jquery and prototype) and I can put it in tonight when i get home > (different code machines). Well my main question is why you define the backend in the Weblocks demo code. Shouldn't it be part of the core code? > As for what happens, well since we define > the symbol as a defparameter it will get overwritten which is i think > how it should be done. The reason is that if someone wants to add even > more functionality to the definition they could and are not stuck with > what we define. Yes, that sounds sensible. I seem to remember that we discussed this topic already. > 2- For the namespace i think that is a good idea (i thought about it > but i can not seem to remeber why i did not do it) I can easily do the > change if you want although I would not go so far as specialized APIs > since as i mentioned previously all "weblocks" API should be generic > and each person will extend in his own library the way they want. Tell > me what you think and if you want i can do it quickly. It seems to be enough to put everything under the "Weblocks" (or "weblocks") namespace to start with. Leslie --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
