I understand.  And I also looked at writing a jQuery Ajax framework but I 
didn't get far into it before I realized it wasn't going to be as easy as the 
MooTools one.  I think the issues were the documentation and the way the Ajax 
object worked.  Although, I'm sure a better man than me would have no problems.

I think the reason people like to mix Ajax Framework and jQuery is because 
there are a lot of plugins for jQuery.  This is also true for MooTools 
(http://mootools.net/forge/).  So for me it was the best of both worlds.  I was 
able to pretty easily copy the functionality out of Ajax Framework that I 
needed and then write or use existing plugins.  With the benefit being faster 
page load times because the user doesn't have to download two JS libraries.

Anyway, I would be happy donate the MooTools Ajax framework.  Should I rename 
it to ERSomething?  Should I rename the components as well?  I just used the 
same names as Ajax Framework i.e. AjaxUpdateContainer - should I rename them to 
some prefix+component name?

Johnny Miller
Kahalawai Media Corp.
www.kahalawai.com



On Feb 8, 2012, at 9:12 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:

> Personally, I would go with Dojo since it's really made for data-type apps 
> (but maybe Dojo is more for REST contexts, not for contexts like the current 
> Ajax framework) :-) But the community is asking for jQuery (and almost half 
> of the community is already using it, does everyone have their own jQuery 
> framework?).
> 
> But yeah, if you want to contribute your MooTools framework, I think it would 
> be great :-)
> 
>> Hi Pascal,
>> 
>> I think everyone should give one more pass at MooTools.  I know that jQuery 
>> is very popular right now but MooTools is designed from an object oriented 
>> perspective.  So for people like us, who are already using Java, MooTools 
>> just feels more natural.  If you look at the MooTools documentation 
>> (http://mootools.net/docs/core) it shows you how to easily create classes, 
>> use inheritance, implement composition, extend with categories et al...  
>> Where as jQuery is kind of like a giant collection of scripts that is very 
>> useful for people who are more familiar with that style of programming.
>> 
>> Here is a very good article (granted biased) article that explains the 
>> difference between the two: http://jqueryvsmootools.com/
>> 
>> My two cents,
>> 
>> Johnny Miller
>> Kahalawai Media Corp.
>> www.kahalawai.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 8, 2012, at 8:06 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> 
>>> Looking at the comments and results from the survey, it look like the 
>>> biggest priority for 2012 is to have a jQuery framework for WO (for 
>>> stateful apps, I think the jQuery framework from Ravi Mendis is stateless 
>>> only).
>>> 
>>> So, I have to ask: who can work on a jQuery framework? I'm asking because I 
>>> need to know if we can finance this task. Of if you already have a jQuery 
>>> framework that you made, can you share it with the community? We can even 
>>> "buy it" if we need to.
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/jlmiller%40kahalawai.com
>>> 
>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>> 
> 

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to