W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [webcomponents] Template element parser changes => Proposal for adding DocumentFragment.innerHTML

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 01:15:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCrCA-zoiTsQ=N6trnS0DWwa0A-S7Pv-13K3eB2s-fT_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> The jQuery API shows that at least jQuery developers don't agree with
>> you regarding what is simpler here.
>
> That wouldn't be the first time. :-)
>
> jQuery doesn't really match the Web platform's design aesthetic, with
> method names consisting purely of punctuation, methods that can be used
> both to register a callback and invoke a callback (click(f) vs click()),
> the style of using return values to enable chained invocations of methods
> on a specific object, etc.
>
> I have great respect for jQuery as a library, but I'm not sure it's
> necessarily a given that just because jQuery does something one way, it
> makes sense for the Web platform to do it that way as well.

To a large extent, jQuery is the *reason* for the modern Web
platform's design aesthetic.  Claiming it "doesn't really match" is,
frankly, somewhat farcical.

You don't need to duplicate jQuery, but don't let your personal
distaste for its style cloud your judgement.  Authors *overwhelmingly*
like this style. It would be good to pay attention to that.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 23:16:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:52 GMT