That last concept, JavaScript consolidation, is on the drawing board. It will work especially well in the concert with the existing GZIP compression. There's just a few things to work out, such as how to properly handle components dynamically adding JavaScript libraries.
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Carl Crowder <carl.crow...@taptu.com> wrote: > I really like jQuery and I use it all the time in various Tapestry apps. But > it's trivial to use it with Tapestry due as you can just do $j = > jQuery.noConflict() and use it as $j instead. Most jQuery libraries use > "jQuery" instead of "$" so there are no conflicts. > > Although I prefer jQuery, I can't see much point in switching Tapestry to it > just to help people who might want to use it. Perhaps you could switch > Tapestry so that the jQuery lib gets to use "$", but there's no need to > rewrite everything. > > The other thing is that it would reduce HTTP request if you don't need to > load jQuery /and/ prototype. But couldn't some filter just pile all of the > javascript required by a page into one script? Something like: > > <script src="tapestry_tmp_0981234.js" /> > > which is just all the js used in the order it was declared? That'd have the > same functionality, for less requests. Same goes for CSS. > > Carl > > Onno Scheffers wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Chris Lewis >> <chris_le...@bellsouth.net>wrote: >> >>> that it is less than ideal for building front end widgets >> >> >> >> That's not true. As a matter of fact, jQuery is currently one of the most >> popular Javascript libraries for developing frontend widgets and I see >> very >> cool widgets popping up all over the place which I would love to turn into >> Tapestry libraries. >> You'll ususally combine Prototype with Scriptaculous. You can use JQuery >> with JQuery UI (http://ui.jquery.com). If you Google for jQuery widgets >> you'll see endless lists of available widgets. See interface for example ( >> http://interface.eyecon.ro). >> >> >> >> >>> If I'm mistaken about the abilities of jQuery, that is just my >>> inexperience >>> with it. The question I would propose is, what's the point? >>> >> >> Well... I'm a Java developer with lots of jQuery experience. To me it felt >> like the entire world was shifting towards jQuery. Google uses jQuery for >> example (http://blog.jquery.com/2007/11/02/google-using-jquery/) and >> Microsoft even officially wants to support it and ship it with Visual >> Studio >> ( >> >> http://www.microsoft.com/web/content.aspx?id=microsoft-adopts-open-source-jQuery-JavaScript-library >> ). >> >> So while I knew jQuery and around me everyone started using jQuery, I had >> to >> go back, and learn Prototype since I'm usually the guy that does the >> front-end web components and adding two web-frameworks seems like >> overkill. >> >> This was actually a real concern for me when switching to Tapestry 5. >> Prototype is a nice library, but in my opinion it's not nearly as nice as >> jQuery and it performs noticably slower as well. >> >> The problem is that switching to another framework now is that it would >> probably would break 3rd party components and custom Javascript components >> already created in Tapestry projects. >> >> >> regards, >> >> Onno >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
