If you have no reason to chain your plugin (something like $
('#photo').photo(...).css(...).attr(...) then having it return a
different object makes sense. But then, why put it in the jQuery
namespace at all? 'return new smaon.photo(...) makes as much sense.
Danny
On Dec 12, 10:38 am, Smaon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thank you for your answer Danny.
>
> I'm currently trying this way:
>
> jQuery.fn.photo = function (...) {
> var canvas = $(this).get(0);
> return new jQuery.photo(canvas, settings);
>
> }
>
> jQuery.twistMap = function(canvas, settings){
> //create code
>
> this.crop = function(){
> ......
> }
>
> }
>
> usable like this:
>
> var photo = $("#photo").photo(...);
> photo.crop();
>
> What do you think? For me, while not being perfect, it seems more or
> less ok...
>
> PS: BTW, it there a way to put clean code in this discussion group?
>
