Maybe it's just my jealousy of pattern matching and multi-methods that
makes me want that particular solution. I definitely think that jQuery
is getting big enough that some form of plugin hierarchy would be
nice. (Though I'm perhaps a tad too modest to want a namespace for
myself. perhaps $(...).timer.start() ?)
I recall from last summer there was some discussion of namespacing of
plugins and john didn't seem to think it would be a huge technological
hurdle but it didn't really go anywhere. Personally, I think that
direct namespacing like that removes some of the brevity and
simplicity of jQuery. Though perhaps an importing system could be
used.
jQuery.import("timer");
jQuery(...).stop(); // stops timer events not animations
But this is all a discussion better suited for the dev list.
-blair
On Aug 14, 9:52 am, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 14, 3:34 pm, Blair Mitchelmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > (Though I think the next step in improving how plugins interoperate is
> > allowing multiple plugins to operate under the same name by having the
> > plugin provide some sort of argument test to determine if the provided
> > arguments are valid and then using that plugin on a case by case
> > basis)
>
> i think namespaces would be a better idea, e.g.:
>
> $(...).blair.start(...);
> $(...).blair.stop(...)
>
> i don't know if that type of thing is possible using the current jQ
> code. That sounds like a good question for the list.
