4 ms·
I would actually not consider jQuery to be innovative as much as it was a refinement/improvement of existing libraries such as Prototype and Dojo. I think jQuer
by jordanlev 11y ago
I would actually not consider jQuery to be innovative as much as it was a refinement/improvement of existing libraries such as Prototype and Dojo. I think jQuery is great so this isn't a knock against it, but rather just saying that sometimes one thing comes out that is revolutionary but then something else that is an improvement/iteration on that smooths out the rough edges and becomes "the one framework to rule them all" (for a few years, at least).
- ratbeard 11y agojQuery's api seemed innovative and quite different than the other libraries I used at the time. - css selectors to get at nodes. Very dom-focused, but without messing w/ prototypes like _Prototype_ did - almost every function in the api acted on both single nodes and collection of nodes. It seems like it started the 'chaining' trend. - no complicated class/namespace hierarchy to learn. Every function was on $ or $.fn. `$('.foo').hide('slow')` vs the equivalent in Prototype involved instantiating an Animation object and passing in the dom node, as I recall. - cared about file size and not clobbering other globals.
- terrortrain 11y agoMaking something better by making it more lean, more stable, or more understandable is still innovating. Originality isn't the only factor.
- coldtea 11y agoImprovement on an existing design is still innovation. The invention of rubber tires WAS innovative, even if we had stone/wooden wheels for milennia. And the iPod was innovative, even if we had heavy, crappy UI, plasticky third party mp3 players before that.