You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com> on 2010/08/05 20:27:47 UTC
Why would I choose JQuery?
I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
way.
Kalle
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Christophe Cordenier <ch...@gmail.com>.
Hi !
2010/8/10 Andreas Andreou <an...@di.uoa.gr>
> Wrt jquery vs. others, i'd say jquery has won especially for your
> "everyday webapp", i.e. the webapp that contains lots of html
> pages and mostly serves just that - html pages. Incidentally, i believe
> that that's where Tapestry is good at - creating the markup for those
> pages.
>
> On the other end, there's the "one-page webapps". Those mostly
> serve data in json or xml format and I believe jquery is not well
> suited for those (yet) - interestingly [1] was written today and deals
> with exactly this separation.
>
> To get back to Tapestry though, i tried today Robin's tapestry5-jquery
> after first upgrading it for 5.2 - see [2], [3]
>
> Some tests in [3] are failing but i was anxious to use it so i ported the
> tapestwitter app from prototype to jquery and it almost worked.
Great ! We plan to move wooki from prototype to full jQuery too, and then
improve T5.2 compatiblity of tapestry5-jquery
Thanks for all your feedbacks !
Cheers,
Christophe.
> Both versions
> have the exact same functionality and there's no trace of prototype in the
> jquery version but there's still work to be done (zone updating in my 5.2
> upgrade has some issues - but perhaps i've just messed things up)
>
> Anyway, almost all the changes required were about rewriting custom
> prototype code to jquery - see [4]. So, all in all, tapestry5-jquery
> is definitely
> worth a try
>
> [1] http://rmurphey.posterous.com/on-jquery-large-applications
> [2] http://github.com/andyhot/tapestry5-clientresources/tree/tap-5.2
> [3] http://github.com/andyhot/tapestry5-jquery/tree/tap-5.2
> [4]
> http://github.com/andyhot/tapestwitter/commit/44b5e8a49df4292eddb95499e2b234403b9c5066
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 20:07, Ville Virtanen <vi...@cerion.fi>
> wrote:
> >
> > Portlet support and this Js fix are the most important new features.
> > Especially the no-portlet support part stopped T5 in recent evaluation to
> > build SAP front end and handling portal for multinational customer
> running
> > Oracle's weblogics.
> >
> > - Ville
> >
> >
> > Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> >>
> >> jQuery and Prototype have similar capabilities implemented in
> >> extremely different ways.
> >>
> >> My intention is to factor out what T5 and the standard components use
> >> into a thin wrapper library around either Prototype or jQuery, or
> >> others (such as Ext, YUI, etc.). Name you favorite JS library and
> >> you'll hear people call out their favorites you've never even heard
> >> of!
> >>
> >> At this point, Tapestry has had enough JS exposure for me to identify
> >> a minimum set of common operations.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Pierce Wetter <pi...@paceap.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:50 AM, Michael Gentry wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> A downside to Tapestry adopting JQuery at this point is it hurts those
> >>>> of us who bit the bullet and used Prototype (since it comes with T5
> >>>> for "free"). It would make upgrading more time consuming.
> >>>> Personally, I would prefer JQuery, but there is a cost involved in
> >>>> using it now (additional bandwidth + memory footprint) or in the
> >>>> future (conversion).
> >>>
> >>> Doesn't JQuery support a superset of Prototype? Does anyone know what
> >>> the incompatibilities are?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> >>
> >> Creator of Apache Tapestry
> >>
> >> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> >> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
> >>
> >> (971) 678-5210
> >> http://howardlewisship.com
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Why-would-I-choose-JQuery--tp29360084p29390075.html
> > Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Andreas Andreou - andyhot@apache.org - http://blog.andyhot.gr
> Tapestry PMC / Tacos developer
> Open Source / JEE Consulting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Regards,
Christophe Cordenier.
Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Andreas Andreou <an...@di.uoa.gr>.
Wrt jquery vs. others, i'd say jquery has won especially for your
"everyday webapp", i.e. the webapp that contains lots of html
pages and mostly serves just that - html pages. Incidentally, i believe
that that's where Tapestry is good at - creating the markup for those
pages.
On the other end, there's the "one-page webapps". Those mostly
serve data in json or xml format and I believe jquery is not well
suited for those (yet) - interestingly [1] was written today and deals
with exactly this separation.
To get back to Tapestry though, i tried today Robin's tapestry5-jquery
after first upgrading it for 5.2 - see [2], [3]
Some tests in [3] are failing but i was anxious to use it so i ported the
tapestwitter app from prototype to jquery and it almost worked. Both versions
have the exact same functionality and there's no trace of prototype in the
jquery version but there's still work to be done (zone updating in my 5.2
upgrade has some issues - but perhaps i've just messed things up)
Anyway, almost all the changes required were about rewriting custom
prototype code to jquery - see [4]. So, all in all, tapestry5-jquery
is definitely
worth a try
[1] http://rmurphey.posterous.com/on-jquery-large-applications
[2] http://github.com/andyhot/tapestry5-clientresources/tree/tap-5.2
[3] http://github.com/andyhot/tapestry5-jquery/tree/tap-5.2
[4] http://github.com/andyhot/tapestwitter/commit/44b5e8a49df4292eddb95499e2b234403b9c5066
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 20:07, Ville Virtanen <vi...@cerion.fi> wrote:
>
> Portlet support and this Js fix are the most important new features.
> Especially the no-portlet support part stopped T5 in recent evaluation to
> build SAP front end and handling portal for multinational customer running
> Oracle's weblogics.
>
> - Ville
>
>
> Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>
>> jQuery and Prototype have similar capabilities implemented in
>> extremely different ways.
>>
>> My intention is to factor out what T5 and the standard components use
>> into a thin wrapper library around either Prototype or jQuery, or
>> others (such as Ext, YUI, etc.). Name you favorite JS library and
>> you'll hear people call out their favorites you've never even heard
>> of!
>>
>> At this point, Tapestry has had enough JS exposure for me to identify
>> a minimum set of common operations.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Pierce Wetter <pi...@paceap.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:50 AM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>>>
>>>> A downside to Tapestry adopting JQuery at this point is it hurts those
>>>> of us who bit the bullet and used Prototype (since it comes with T5
>>>> for "free"). It would make upgrading more time consuming.
>>>> Personally, I would prefer JQuery, but there is a cost involved in
>>>> using it now (additional bandwidth + memory footprint) or in the
>>>> future (conversion).
>>>
>>> Doesn't JQuery support a superset of Prototype? Does anyone know what
>>> the incompatibilities are?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>
>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>
>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>
>> (971) 678-5210
>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-would-I-choose-JQuery--tp29360084p29390075.html
> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Andreas Andreou - andyhot@apache.org - http://blog.andyhot.gr
Tapestry PMC / Tacos developer
Open Source / JEE Consulting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Ville Virtanen <vi...@cerion.fi>.
Portlet support and this Js fix are the most important new features.
Especially the no-portlet support part stopped T5 in recent evaluation to
build SAP front end and handling portal for multinational customer running
Oracle's weblogics.
- Ville
Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>
> jQuery and Prototype have similar capabilities implemented in
> extremely different ways.
>
> My intention is to factor out what T5 and the standard components use
> into a thin wrapper library around either Prototype or jQuery, or
> others (such as Ext, YUI, etc.). Name you favorite JS library and
> you'll hear people call out their favorites you've never even heard
> of!
>
> At this point, Tapestry has had enough JS exposure for me to identify
> a minimum set of common operations.
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Pierce Wetter <pi...@paceap.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:50 AM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>>
>>> A downside to Tapestry adopting JQuery at this point is it hurts those
>>> of us who bit the bullet and used Prototype (since it comes with T5
>>> for "free"). It would make upgrading more time consuming.
>>> Personally, I would prefer JQuery, but there is a cost involved in
>>> using it now (additional bandwidth + memory footprint) or in the
>>> future (conversion).
>>
>> Doesn't JQuery support a superset of Prototype? Does anyone know what
>> the incompatibilities are?
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-would-I-choose-JQuery--tp29360084p29390075.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
jQuery and Prototype have similar capabilities implemented in
extremely different ways.
My intention is to factor out what T5 and the standard components use
into a thin wrapper library around either Prototype or jQuery, or
others (such as Ext, YUI, etc.). Name you favorite JS library and
you'll hear people call out their favorites you've never even heard
of!
At this point, Tapestry has had enough JS exposure for me to identify
a minimum set of common operations.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Pierce Wetter <pi...@paceap.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:50 AM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>
>> A downside to Tapestry adopting JQuery at this point is it hurts those
>> of us who bit the bullet and used Prototype (since it comes with T5
>> for "free"). It would make upgrading more time consuming.
>> Personally, I would prefer JQuery, but there is a cost involved in
>> using it now (additional bandwidth + memory footprint) or in the
>> future (conversion).
>
> Doesn't JQuery support a superset of Prototype? Does anyone know what the incompatibilities are?
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Pierce Wetter <pi...@paceap.com>.
On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:50 AM, Michael Gentry wrote:
> A downside to Tapestry adopting JQuery at this point is it hurts those
> of us who bit the bullet and used Prototype (since it comes with T5
> for "free"). It would make upgrading more time consuming.
> Personally, I would prefer JQuery, but there is a cost involved in
> using it now (additional bandwidth + memory footprint) or in the
> future (conversion).
Doesn't JQuery support a superset of Prototype? Does anyone know what the incompatibilities are?
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Michael Gentry <mg...@masslight.net>.
A downside to Tapestry adopting JQuery at this point is it hurts those
of us who bit the bullet and used Prototype (since it comes with T5
for "free"). It would make upgrading more time consuming.
Personally, I would prefer JQuery, but there is a cost involved in
using it now (additional bandwidth + memory footprint) or in the
future (conversion).
Thanks,
mrg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Chris Mylonas <ch...@mrvoip.com.au>.
Looks good!! I vaguely remember reading that when I started tapestry development (yes I'm still new...)
Just to add a bit more noise to this topic:
I work here http://omnium.net.au and the learning CMS has an excellent administrative interface. It was written two years ago by a few guys. They chose prototype/scriptaculous - even though the admin interface is pretty schmick (good), they say that if they did it again they'd do it in jQuery.
That was enough for me - not being a js developer, I picked up jQuery In Action two weekends ago for a bit of a poke around. Hence my "awesome contrib" statement earlier in this thread.
Drupal, a very popular PHP CMS includes jQuery as it's js library - http://drupal.org
I've also noticed in the java web world that number of books seems to be a popular metric, here are some quick stats from my searches:
Safari - O'Reilly:
jQuery, 218 results
Scriptaculous - 94 results
Amazon.com
jQuery - 184
Scriptaculous - 31
Packtpub
jQuery - 2 pages, i.e. more than 20
scriptaculous - 7
The creator of jQuery, John Resig works at Mozilla, so it's not going away either.
Enough from me!
Cheers
Chris
On 09/08/2010, at 9:54 PM, Dmitry Gusev wrote:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@tapestry.apache.org/msg16770.html
>
> "I feel a gradual
> move in that direction is the way towards eventually replacing
> Prototype & Scriptaculous with jQuery, and making it possible to
> cleanly support other JavaScript foundations."
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 15:32, Inge Solvoll <in...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If this is correct, that jQuery has around 40% market share and prototype
>> around 9%, isn't it a major popularity drawback for T5 to be using
>> prototype
>> as its javascript core?
>>
>> Right now, potential new users could be thinking:
>>
>> "Hey, T5 uses an outdated, boring and poorly supported javascript
>> framework.
>> Why? Is it an outdated, boring and poorly supported framework itself`?".
>>
>> With jQuery in the core instead of prototype, it would be an entirely
>> different story. One of the biggeste problems for T5 today is that it is
>> considered alternative in many ways. Tiny (small user base), poorly
>> supported, poorly documented, non-standard (not being Spring or JSF).
>> Unfair
>> in many ways, but considered true by many people. The community is making
>> an
>> effort these days to solve some of these issues (documentation, marketing),
>> but it might actually be a bigger win to just integrate with very popular
>> tools, and let their light reflect on us. jQuery being one of the shiniest
>> and most logical ones to integrate with.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Chris Mylonas <ch...@mrvoip.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome contrib!
>>> I'll hopefully find some time to work with it this month - have you got
>> any
>>> publicly accessible demos of it in action?
>>>
>>> On 06/08/2010, at 4:46 AM, Robin Komiwes wrote:
>>>
>>>> I might be not objective since I'm in love with jQuery, but imho,
>>> choosing
>>>> jQuery over others will avoid you to have a *big* technical debt.
>>>>
>>>> You might be interested by this reading:
>>>>
>> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/03/26/jquery-triumphant-march-to-success/
>>>>
>>>> For your tab component, what about this one:
>>> http://jqueryui.com/demos/tabs/
>>>> It's skinnable, customizable, and it should be easy to integrate it
>> into
>>>> tapestry5 (and to contribute it to
>>> http://github.com/got5/tapestry5-jquery;))
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>>> <ka...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
>>>>> full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
>>>>> drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
>>>>> Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
>>>>> being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
>>>>> production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
>>>>> want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
>>>>> available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
>>>>> marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
>>>>> having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
>>>>> the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
>>>>> performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
>>>>> an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
>>>>> having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
>>>>> something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
>>>>> bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
>>>>> customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
>>>>> would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
>>>>> comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
>>>>> libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
>>>>> way.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kalle
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dmitry Gusev
>
> AnjLab Team
> http://anjlab.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Dmitry Gusev <dm...@gmail.com>.
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@tapestry.apache.org/msg16770.html
"I feel a gradual
move in that direction is the way towards eventually replacing
Prototype & Scriptaculous with jQuery, and making it possible to
cleanly support other JavaScript foundations."
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 15:32, Inge Solvoll <in...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If this is correct, that jQuery has around 40% market share and prototype
> around 9%, isn't it a major popularity drawback for T5 to be using
> prototype
> as its javascript core?
>
> Right now, potential new users could be thinking:
>
> "Hey, T5 uses an outdated, boring and poorly supported javascript
> framework.
> Why? Is it an outdated, boring and poorly supported framework itself`?".
>
> With jQuery in the core instead of prototype, it would be an entirely
> different story. One of the biggeste problems for T5 today is that it is
> considered alternative in many ways. Tiny (small user base), poorly
> supported, poorly documented, non-standard (not being Spring or JSF).
> Unfair
> in many ways, but considered true by many people. The community is making
> an
> effort these days to solve some of these issues (documentation, marketing),
> but it might actually be a bigger win to just integrate with very popular
> tools, and let their light reflect on us. jQuery being one of the shiniest
> and most logical ones to integrate with.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Chris Mylonas <ch...@mrvoip.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Awesome contrib!
> > I'll hopefully find some time to work with it this month - have you got
> any
> > publicly accessible demos of it in action?
> >
> > On 06/08/2010, at 4:46 AM, Robin Komiwes wrote:
> >
> > > I might be not objective since I'm in love with jQuery, but imho,
> > choosing
> > > jQuery over others will avoid you to have a *big* technical debt.
> > >
> > > You might be interested by this reading:
> > >
> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/03/26/jquery-triumphant-march-to-success/
> > >
> > > For your tab component, what about this one:
> > http://jqueryui.com/demos/tabs/
> > > It's skinnable, customizable, and it should be easy to integrate it
> into
> > > tapestry5 (and to contribute it to
> > http://github.com/got5/tapestry5-jquery;))
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> > > <ka...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
> > >> full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
> > >> drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
> > >> Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
> > >> being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
> > >> production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
> > >> want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
> > >> available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
> > >> marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
> > >> having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
> > >> the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
> > >> performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
> > >> an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
> > >> having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
> > >> something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
> > >> bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
> > >> customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
> > >> would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
> > >> comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
> > >> libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
> > >> way.
> > >>
> > >> Kalle
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
--
Dmitry Gusev
AnjLab Team
http://anjlab.com
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Inge Solvoll <in...@gmail.com>.
If this is correct, that jQuery has around 40% market share and prototype
around 9%, isn't it a major popularity drawback for T5 to be using prototype
as its javascript core?
Right now, potential new users could be thinking:
"Hey, T5 uses an outdated, boring and poorly supported javascript framework.
Why? Is it an outdated, boring and poorly supported framework itself`?".
With jQuery in the core instead of prototype, it would be an entirely
different story. One of the biggeste problems for T5 today is that it is
considered alternative in many ways. Tiny (small user base), poorly
supported, poorly documented, non-standard (not being Spring or JSF). Unfair
in many ways, but considered true by many people. The community is making an
effort these days to solve some of these issues (documentation, marketing),
but it might actually be a bigger win to just integrate with very popular
tools, and let their light reflect on us. jQuery being one of the shiniest
and most logical ones to integrate with.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Chris Mylonas <ch...@mrvoip.com.au> wrote:
> Awesome contrib!
> I'll hopefully find some time to work with it this month - have you got any
> publicly accessible demos of it in action?
>
> On 06/08/2010, at 4:46 AM, Robin Komiwes wrote:
>
> > I might be not objective since I'm in love with jQuery, but imho,
> choosing
> > jQuery over others will avoid you to have a *big* technical debt.
> >
> > You might be interested by this reading:
> > http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/03/26/jquery-triumphant-march-to-success/
> >
> > For your tab component, what about this one:
> http://jqueryui.com/demos/tabs/
> > It's skinnable, customizable, and it should be easy to integrate it into
> > tapestry5 (and to contribute it to
> http://github.com/got5/tapestry5-jquery;))
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> > <ka...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
> >> full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
> >> drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
> >> Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
> >> being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
> >> production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
> >> want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
> >> available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
> >> marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
> >> having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
> >> the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
> >> performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
> >> an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
> >> having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
> >> something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
> >> bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
> >> customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
> >> would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
> >> comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
> >> libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
> >> way.
> >>
> >> Kalle
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Chris Mylonas <ch...@mrvoip.com.au>.
Awesome contrib!
I'll hopefully find some time to work with it this month - have you got any publicly accessible demos of it in action?
On 06/08/2010, at 4:46 AM, Robin Komiwes wrote:
> I might be not objective since I'm in love with jQuery, but imho, choosing
> jQuery over others will avoid you to have a *big* technical debt.
>
> You might be interested by this reading:
> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/03/26/jquery-triumphant-march-to-success/
>
> For your tab component, what about this one: http://jqueryui.com/demos/tabs/
> It's skinnable, customizable, and it should be easy to integrate it into
> tapestry5 (and to contribute it to http://github.com/got5/tapestry5-jquery;))
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
>> full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
>> drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
>> Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
>> being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
>> production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
>> want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
>> available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
>> marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
>> having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
>> the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
>> performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
>> an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
>> having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
>> something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
>> bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
>> customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
>> would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
>> comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
>> libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
>> way.
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Robin Komiwes <ro...@gmail.com>.
I might be not objective since I'm in love with jQuery, but imho, choosing
jQuery over others will avoid you to have a *big* technical debt.
You might be interested by this reading:
http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/03/26/jquery-triumphant-march-to-success/
For your tab component, what about this one: http://jqueryui.com/demos/tabs/
It's skinnable, customizable, and it should be easy to integrate it into
tapestry5 (and to contribute it to http://github.com/got5/tapestry5-jquery;))
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
> full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
> drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
> Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
> being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
> production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
> want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
> available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
> marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
> having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
> the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
> performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
> an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
> having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
> something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
> bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
> customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
> would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
> comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
> libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
> way.
>
> Kalle
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: Why would I choose JQuery?
Posted by Ville Virtanen <vi...@cerion.fi>.
Hi,
there are several reasons:
1. It's widely in use and actively developed. Even endorsed by Microsoft.
("Microsoft now fully supports jQuery and distributes it with the ASP.NET
Model-View Controller (MVC) framework. Furthermore, extensions have been
deve..." source: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd453033.aspx)
2. It is released much more frequently than Prototype - the fear that we're
using dying js stack is enough to convert..
3. Easier to find help (Bigger community, more books etc.)
4. More advanced
The last part of course is debatable. Strong commitment from big players
make it safe bet.
- Ville
Kalle Korhonen-2 wrote:
>
> I have an older T4 app that I'm going to upgrade to T5. It's not a
> full RIA but nevertheless a fairly fancy, interactive web app with
> drag & drop, ajax file uploads etc. The UI of the app was based on
> Prototype and Dojo 0.4.3 which served me well at the time despite of
> being a bit on the heavy side. I haven't really used JQuery in
> production apps yet but I wouldn't mind switching but if I do, I don't
> want to drag Prototype around with it. There are T5 integration libs
> available both for a newer version of Dojo and for JQuery. It might be
> marginally easier to adjust the existing Javascript for Dojo than
> having to rewrite everything with JQuery but as said, I'm fine with
> the cost. Performance always matters, so load times, execution
> performance, ability to use CDN etc. all matter. I don't mind filing
> an occasional issue, but I don't want to get sucked into seriously
> having to debug and maintain another add-on library so I'd prefer
> something relatively stable even if it didn't have all the latest
> bells and whistles. Of ready-made components, only a good, skinnable,
> customizable and extensible tab component is relevant to me. Now, why
> would I choose JQuery over the other choices? I'd really love to hear
> comments from people who've had experience of multiple Javascript
> libraries and have made a switch to JQuery or perhaps gone the other
> way.
>
> Kalle
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-would-I-choose-JQuery--tp29360084p29390012.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org