On 29 Sep 2008, at 05:00, ChessMess wrote: > Is it of any concern that more and more take up the JQuery banner? Why > didn't they pick Prototype and Scriptaculous? Seems like we jumped on > the REST bandwagon pretty quick but we hold to P&S in face of its ever > growing popularity and adoption. Is Rails leadership tied to P&S on a > more emotional level then they were with SOAP? Heck I don't know, I'm > no expert, its just that it seems there has been a call for JQuery on > Rails as the official library and yet in spite of this and in > deference to what we are seeing at large the response from the Rails > leaders seems to be something akin to "We don't care whats going on, > we are P&S no matter what". Not to say P&S is bad, not at all, but > then SOAP wasn't bad either and we made the change. > > What do you think?
Back in the days where Rails incorporated the javascript helpers, jQuery was nowhere near P&S. Also, Prototype has a Ruby-esque syntax, in the RUBY on rails context I find this a very valid choice. If you're only using the Javascript helpers within Rails, it shouldn't matter to you whether it uses Prototype, JQuery, YUI, Dojo, … The Rails code will be exactly the same. If you're used to writing your Javascript code yourself, there's nothing holding you back from using another library in your Rails app, just don't count on the Javascript helpers anymore (or use the jrails plugin if you really have to). Best regards Peter De Berdt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
