Hi, > The end result is probably a net enlargement of included > JS, IMO.
You can always include the convenience functions in your own code. Then you have no net enlargement of code. You even can leave out those you don't intend to use reducint the size of the whole js code. Of course you can say, that this speaks for using no JS library at all, because cou can always define all the functions you need in your own code. Well the reason for libraries is to safe work. Thus it is allways a ballance between including expectedly much used functions and excluding less used. More powerful functions are more likely to be used a lot than functions with only a single, very special use case. Based on that I very much appreciate the decissions of the dev team. That way leads to a library that is as powerfull as possible by staying as small as possible. There are still some whishes I'd have to make some functions more powerfull. specially those are text(), attr() and is(). There was a discussion about those functions: http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/30e8d9ae2fc8b57e/d8cf031c88b1da64?rnum=1 I guess, the core developers did not have the time to join that discussion, though I'd appreciate their comments. Christof
