Re: WOCommunity membership and goals
Re: WOCommunity membership and goals
- Subject: Re: WOCommunity membership and goals
- From: ISHIMOTO Ken <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 09:46:57 +0100
Mixing is no problem.
We mix our JQuery Framework and wonder Ajax Framework every day, in all projects.
Really No Problem. But you have to know how to do it.
Ken
On 2013/02/07, at 17:59, Matteo Centro <email@hidden> wrote:
> Speaking for my company, sometimes we are forced to use jQuery for some things.
> We try to do as much as possible with Ajax.framework (prototype) but some things are simply not feasible without jQuery. We generally have use the two mixed, which is sometimes a source for headaches. A nice thing would be to have a port of the prototype Ajax.framework to jQuery but that's way beyond our area of expertise, I can't even say if it's feasible.
>
> Matteo
>
> On 07/feb/2013, at 17:23, Pascal Robert <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>>
>> Le 2013-02-07 à 11:21, Musall Maik <email@hidden> a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>> Am 07.02.2013 um 16:58 schrieb Pascal Robert <email@hidden>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le 2013-02-07 à 10:44, Johann Werner <email@hidden> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 07.02.2013 um 16:12 schrieb James Cicenia <email@hidden>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I concur... a strong integration of WO with CoreData and Syncing, would be a really nice marketing hook too. Which could translate into more members!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And yes, jQuery does have the momentum in the AJAX world.
>>>>>
>>>>> I see jQuery as an important option for Wonder though I am not sure if its the best way to have a separate AjaxPrototype, AjaxJQuery, AjaxMooTools, … framework which would make maintenance a nightmare if you want to keep those feature equal. If I remember correctly long time ago the idea to make some sort of Javascript API wrapper was already discussed / proposed on the list to have only one single Ajax framework and being able choose if you want to use prototype, jQuery or any other supported JS library.
>>>>> I already played with the thought to do some test code in that direction though had not enough time yet. What do you think, is that something the we should realize or does the community want a complete jQuery replacement of the prototype framework?
>>>>
>>>> I'm curious about this too, because looking at the surveys, looks like most people use both jQuery and the Ajax framework:
>>>>
>>>> Ajax framework from Wonder 81%
>>>> jQuery 69%
>>>>
>>>> Last year:
>>>>
>>>> Ajax framework from Wonder 69%
>>>> jQuery 47%
>>>
>>> The survey was bit biased because it listed jQuery specifically but not moo tools.
>>
>> This is why we have a "Other" option, and two organizations listed MooTools in "other".
>>
>>> I'm with Johann. We should have one server-side framework that supports the main JS libs, or we'll be seeing more frameworks eventually make their way into the "Archive" attic ;-)
>>>
>>> Maik
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>
>>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>
>> This email sent to email@hidden
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden