> Whether or not one "likes" jQuery or not isn't the point. Tapestry is > built with prototype, and it works. That's the point. Were it built with > jQuery, I would have raised the same question if the suggestion of > switching to prototype had been brought up. It's not my preference > that's behind my resistance, it's the simple pragmatism of "if it ain't > broke don't fix it." On the other hand, the prospect of a pluggable JS > framework is interesting and I'm all for that. That is a feature; an > improvement. A wholesale switch from prototype to jQuery just doesn't > seem like time well-spent.
Can't agree more :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
