I'm going to throw my suggestion in:
$(...).oneTime();
$(...).everyTime();
$(...).stopTime();
Cheers,
-js
P.S. I approved your account so there shouldn't be a delay anymore.
On 8/14/07, Blair Mitchelmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> 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.
>
>
