You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Felix Knecht <fe...@otego.com> on 2008/02/04 10:00:28 UTC
C2.2 dojotoolkit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi all
Trying to do some ajax stuff I did realize that we still use the
dojotoolkit 0.4.3 which is a really quite old version. Are there any
plans about migrating to a newer version - latest is 1.0.2
(http://dojotoolkit.org/downloads)?
Regards
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHptQs2lZVCB08qHERArPfAJ9YGmYMowleQicGCcnbZ/9fwPU3ZQCcCfhg
ZwBcmcBr0AetxZ1F47Usq/A=
=RgLs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@apache.org>.
Hi Joerg
On 6 Feb 2008, at 05:26, Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 04.02.2008 08:43, Dev at weitling wrote:
>
>> if the migration to Dojo 1.0 tends to become a big piece of work
>> what about migrating to Prototype/Scriptaculous (or similar)?
>
> The last Dojo update to 0.4.3 was not that long ago, was it? So it
> can't be too hard to update ... Of course I might be totally wrong :-)
It is actually quite a lot of work, I have been looking into it ......
I'd love to do it, but being self-employed, cannot spare the time/
expense right now ...... unless someone is willing to offer some
sponsorship ;-)
There have been quite a few architectural changes going from 0.4.n to
1.0, including really core stuff that we use heavily like the auto
package loading being removed.
Another big aspect is re-writing the widgets that still use other
third-party libraries, to custom dojo widgets, we really could be
using one Ajax library, not several.
I hope we find a solution, we have discussed the same issues for two
years running now at CocoonGTs !
best regards
Jeremy
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 04.02.2008 08:43, Dev at weitling wrote:
> if the migration to Dojo 1.0 tends to become a big piece of work what
> about migrating to Prototype/Scriptaculous (or similar)?
The last Dojo update to 0.4.3 was not that long ago, was it? So it can't
be too hard to update ... Of course I might be totally wrong :-)
Joerg
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Andy Stevens wrote:
> On 05/02/2008, Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Dev at weitling wrote:
>> Prototype/Scriptaculous has a smaller scope than Dojo that brings loads
>> of features. You don't have to use all of them though and can strip down
>> Dojo with the "compressor" they provides that embeds and obfuscates
>> everything you need in one file.
>>
>> Prototype also considers that it "owns" the page and tweaks the
>> prototype of many built-in classes such as Object, Array, Element, etc.
>> This makes code more compact but has the very important drawback of
>> breaking other libraries you would like to use in the same page
>> (particularly the "for (prop in object)" construct no more works as
>> expected).
>>
>
> Just a random thought...
> If I understand it correctly, dojo is only used by the presentation
> aspects of the forms block, and only when ajax is enabled; if ajax is
> not enabled, the forms are processed differently and don't contain any
> dojo references, just plain (X)HTML. If so, would it be possible to
> add alternative presentation transformations that use
> prototype/scriptaculous (or jquery, or ext, or yui, or ...) instead?
> That way it could use whichever library any individual site developer
> is most comfortable with (or which is already used elsewhere in the
> site). I guess to avoid having to add support for every available
> toolkit into the forms block itself, this part of it should be
> separated out into individual block dependencies (forms-dojo,
> forms-yui, etc.) and specifying which one to use would just be down to
> which of them you had in your app's pom and/or bean configurations.
> Or is this all a crazy dream and totally impractical?
>
It is theoretically possible since the server-side stuff is pretty much
toolkit-agnostic. Now it seems maintaining one implementation is already
a problem, so I imagine having 2 or 3 implementations won't really
address this problem...
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez - http://bluxte.net
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Andy Stevens <in...@googlemail.com>.
On 05/02/2008, Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org> wrote:
> Dev at weitling wrote:
> Prototype/Scriptaculous has a smaller scope than Dojo that brings loads
> of features. You don't have to use all of them though and can strip down
> Dojo with the "compressor" they provides that embeds and obfuscates
> everything you need in one file.
>
> Prototype also considers that it "owns" the page and tweaks the
> prototype of many built-in classes such as Object, Array, Element, etc.
> This makes code more compact but has the very important drawback of
> breaking other libraries you would like to use in the same page
> (particularly the "for (prop in object)" construct no more works as
> expected).
Just a random thought...
If I understand it correctly, dojo is only used by the presentation
aspects of the forms block, and only when ajax is enabled; if ajax is
not enabled, the forms are processed differently and don't contain any
dojo references, just plain (X)HTML. If so, would it be possible to
add alternative presentation transformations that use
prototype/scriptaculous (or jquery, or ext, or yui, or ...) instead?
That way it could use whichever library any individual site developer
is most comfortable with (or which is already used elsewhere in the
site). I guess to avoid having to add support for every available
toolkit into the forms block itself, this part of it should be
separated out into individual block dependencies (forms-dojo,
forms-yui, etc.) and specifying which one to use would just be down to
which of them you had in your app's pom and/or bean configurations.
Or is this all a crazy dream and totally impractical?
Andy.
--
http://pseudoq.sourceforge.net/ Open source java Sudoku solver
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Dev at weitling wrote:
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> thanks for answering.
>
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>> Prototype/Scriptaculous has a smaller scope than Dojo that brings
>> loads of features. You don't have to use all of them though and can
>> strip down Dojo with the "compressor" they provides that embeds and
>> obfuscates everything you need in one file.
>>
>> Prototype also considers that it "owns" the page and tweaks the
>> prototype of many built-in classes such as Object, Array, Element,
>> etc. This makes code more compact but has the very important drawback
>> of breaking other libraries you would like to use in the same page
>> (particularly the "for (prop in object)" construct no more works as
>> expected).
>
> Yes, recently I've seen that, too, using Scriptaculous in a current
> PHP project. Seems rather invasive.
>
>> As far as documentation is concerned, I have no opinion, digging in
>> the code more often than reading the documentation :-P
>
> Thank god docs of Dojo have improved, the only book I could find is
> cheap but rather thin ("Dojo Toolkit. schnell+kompakt" by Michael
> Seemann).
You german people have lots of german books ! Tech writers in France
often write in english for US publishers... who sometimes also publish a
french translation!
>> That being said, upgrading to Dojo 1.x is definitely something to be
>> done. I personally don't have the cycles for it though...
>
> And I lack the knowledge :-/
> Where do you live? So I can start a pilgrimage to convince you ;-)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=pechabou,+fr
But as for every pilgrimage, you have to walk on your knees all the way :-P
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez - http://bluxte.net
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Dev at weitling <de...@weitling.net>.
Hi Sylvain,
thanks for answering.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Prototype/Scriptaculous has a smaller scope than Dojo that brings
> loads of features. You don't have to use all of them though and can
> strip down Dojo with the "compressor" they provides that embeds and
> obfuscates everything you need in one file.
>
> Prototype also considers that it "owns" the page and tweaks the
> prototype of many built-in classes such as Object, Array, Element,
> etc. This makes code more compact but has the very important drawback
> of breaking other libraries you would like to use in the same page
> (particularly the "for (prop in object)" construct no more works as
> expected).
Yes, recently I've seen that, too, using Scriptaculous in a current PHP
project. Seems rather invasive.
> As far as documentation is concerned, I have no opinion, digging in
> the code more often than reading the documentation :-P
Thank god docs of Dojo have improved, the only book I could find is
cheap but rather thin ("Dojo Toolkit. schnell+kompakt" by Michael Seemann).
> That being said, upgrading to Dojo 1.x is definitely something to be
> done. I personally don't have the cycles for it though...
And I lack the knowledge :-/
Where do you live? So I can start a pilgrimage to convince you ;-)
Regards,
Florian
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Dev at weitling wrote:
> Hi Jeroen,
>
> if the migration to Dojo 1.0 tends to become a big piece of work what
> about migrating to Prototype/Scriptaculous (or similar)?
> I'm not the Javascript guru but it would be nice to have a feature
> list (including quality of documentation) for re-evaluating the
> client-side-javascript-library. Who was the developer introducing Dojo
> in Cocoon? What does he/she think about it?
This is me :-)
Prototype/Scriptaculous has a smaller scope than Dojo that brings loads
of features. You don't have to use all of them though and can strip down
Dojo with the "compressor" they provides that embeds and obfuscates
everything you need in one file.
Prototype also considers that it "owns" the page and tweaks the
prototype of many built-in classes such as Object, Array, Element, etc.
This makes code more compact but has the very important drawback of
breaking other libraries you would like to use in the same page
(particularly the "for (prop in object)" construct no more works as
expected).
As far as documentation is concerned, I have no opinion, digging in the
code more often than reading the documentation :-P
That being said, upgrading to Dojo 1.x is definitely something to be
done. I personally don't have the cycles for it though...
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez - http://bluxte.net
Re: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Dev at weitling <de...@weitling.net>.
Hi Jeroen,
if the migration to Dojo 1.0 tends to become a big piece of work what
about migrating to Prototype/Scriptaculous (or similar)?
I'm not the Javascript guru but it would be nice to have a feature list
(including quality of documentation) for re-evaluating the
client-side-javascript-library. Who was the developer introducing Dojo
in Cocoon? What does he/she think about it?
BTW: A list of the original introducers for the components would be nice.
Regards,
Florian
Jeroen Reijn wrote:
> Hi Felix,
>
> We've spoken about upgrading at the recent Cocoon GT in Rome. We were at
> the point were Dojo was waiting for its 1.0 release. Now this was
> already a while ago and as far as I can see nobody took the deep dive
> into the migration yet. I know Jeremy was thinking about this, but was
> waiting for a project that would give him some time to actually spend on
> this migration.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeroen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Felix Knecht [mailto:felix@otego.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 10:00 AM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: C2.2 dojotoolkit
>
> Hi all
>
> Trying to do some ajax stuff I did realize that we still use the
> dojotoolkit 0.4.3 which is a really quite old version. Are there any
> plans about migrating to a newer version - latest is 1.0.2
> (http://dojotoolkit.org/downloads)?
>
> Regards
> Felix
RE: C2.2 dojotoolkit
Posted by Jeroen Reijn <j....@hippo.nl>.
Hi Felix,
We've spoken about upgrading at the recent Cocoon GT in Rome. We were at
the point were Dojo was waiting for its 1.0 release. Now this was
already a while ago and as far as I can see nobody took the deep dive
into the migration yet. I know Jeremy was thinking about this, but was
waiting for a project that would give him some time to actually spend on
this migration.
Regards,
Jeroen
-----Original Message-----
From: Felix Knecht [mailto:felix@otego.com]
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 10:00 AM
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: C2.2 dojotoolkit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi all
Trying to do some ajax stuff I did realize that we still use the
dojotoolkit 0.4.3 which is a really quite old version. Are there any
plans about migrating to a newer version - latest is 1.0.2
(http://dojotoolkit.org/downloads)?
Regards
Felix
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHptQs2lZVCB08qHERArPfAJ9YGmYMowleQicGCcnbZ/9fwPU3ZQCcCfhg
ZwBcmcBr0AetxZ1F47Usq/A=
=RgLs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----