5 ms·

Announcing The jQuery Standards Team

60 points by knowtheory 15y ago

ecaron 15y ago
One of the most intriguing parts of this endeavor is utilizing GitHub's issue tracker - https://github.com/jquery/standards/issues https://github.com/jquery/standards/issues - to openly discuss and debate topics that the standards group should be lobbying.
- davej 15y ago
  Here's another interesting use of the issue tracker by Paul Irish (of the jQuery Standards Team): https://github.com/paulirish/lazyweb-requests/issues https://github.com/paulirish/lazyweb-requests/issues
  - taitems 15y ago
    Thank you so very much for this. I'm a fan of all things Paul Irish and now I'm making my way through the list in great detail.
knowtheory 15y ago
This is interesting. jQuery started as a way to smooth over the variations delivered by different browser implementations. So by it's nature it's goal is delivering a better experience for developers using JS. The tension i see is that browser implementations by their very nature are a deviation and departure from the standard. jQuery is a repair process on someone else's broken shit. So, jQuery has lots of anti-patterns for how things shouldn't be done, and some of the workarounds that are actively in deployment. It'll be interesting to see whether this injects a voice for sanity and practicality into the discussion process, or whether this will just make conversations about standards more vociferous.
Xurinos 15y ago
My first thought about a jQuery standards team was that they would rate plugins on "adheres to jQuery interface standard". Too many times I grab some contributor's plugin for adding behavior to primitives, only to find out that they taint the namespace unnecessarily or depart from jQuery's query-and-return model and require invasive workarounds to conform. jQuery is really flexible; many "plugins" are not.
Archio 15y ago
This is great, developers could use a voice at the W3C. Wait, how did they do that awesome effect with the screenshot that's slanted and angled like that? Is that a special filter, or did they do that in Photoshop?
- Stratoscope 15y ago
  Right click. View Image.
  - Archio 15y ago
    I know, I saw. My question is, how did they do that?
suyash 15y ago
Only 2 people in this standards team?
- threepointone 15y ago
  2 very capable, committed, and well known (in the front end web development community) people. Sounds great to me.
- pjscott 15y ago
  A small but significant increase from zero people.
est 15y ago
I think browser DOM should just embed a native implementation of jQuery.
- mappu 15y ago
  Then you'd be stuck supporting old versions of jQuery. Why not have it the other way around? Have the webpage define the DOM implementation. Taken to its extremes, that would basically solve backward-compatibility.
  - est 15y ago
    > Then you'd be stuck supporting old versions of jQuery. No, support only core functions of jQuery. All of them. You know what is old version? Stuff like getElementById() .
- frobozz 15y ago
  Inconsistency across browsers was one of the things that inspired the development of the various js libraries we use today, including jQuery. Despite the existence of standards (even standards with comprehensive test cases), they are needed to abstract away the differences between the IE, Firefox, Safari etc DOMs. If browsers were to embed a native implementation of jQuery, you'd then have to have some kind of meta-jQuery library to abstract away the differences between IE jQuery, Safari jQuery and Firefox jQuery (etc).

60 points by knowtheory 15y ago

One of the most intriguing parts of this endeavor is utilizing GitHub's issue tracker - https://github.com/jquery/standards/issues https://github.com/jquery/standards/issues - to openly discuss and debate topics that the standards group should be lobbying.

davej 15y ago
Here's another interesting use of the issue tracker by Paul Irish (of the jQuery Standards Team): https://github.com/paulirish/lazyweb-requests/issues https://github.com/paulirish/lazyweb-requests/issues
- taitems 15y ago
  Thank you so very much for this. I'm a fan of all things Paul Irish and now I'm making my way through the list in great detail.

knowtheory 15y ago

This is interesting. jQuery started as a way to smooth over the variations delivered by different browser implementations. So by it's nature it's goal is delivering a better experience for developers using JS. The tension i see is that browser implementations by their very nature are a deviation and departure from the standard. jQuery is a repair process on someone else's broken shit. So, jQuery has lots of anti-patterns for how things shouldn't be done, and some of the workarounds that are actively in deployment. It'll be interesting to see whether this injects a voice for sanity and practicality into the discussion process, or whether this will just make conversations about standards more vociferous.

Xurinos 15y ago

My first thought about a jQuery standards team was that they would rate plugins on "adheres to jQuery interface standard". Too many times I grab some contributor's plugin for adding behavior to primitives, only to find out that they taint the namespace unnecessarily or depart from jQuery's query-and-return model and require invasive workarounds to conform. jQuery is really flexible; many "plugins" are not.

Archio 15y ago

This is great, developers could use a voice at the W3C. Wait, how did they do that awesome effect with the screenshot that's slanted and angled like that? Is that a special filter, or did they do that in Photoshop?

Stratoscope 15y ago
Right click. View Image.
- Archio 15y ago
  I know, I saw. My question is, how did they do that?

suyash 15y ago

Only 2 people in this standards team?

threepointone 15y ago
2 very capable, committed, and well known (in the front end web development community) people. Sounds great to me.
pjscott 15y ago
A small but significant increase from zero people.

est 15y ago

I think browser DOM should just embed a native implementation of jQuery.

mappu 15y ago
Then you'd be stuck supporting old versions of jQuery. Why not have it the other way around? Have the webpage define the DOM implementation. Taken to its extremes, that would basically solve backward-compatibility.
- est 15y ago
  > Then you'd be stuck supporting old versions of jQuery. No, support only core functions of jQuery. All of them. You know what is old version? Stuff like getElementById() .
frobozz 15y ago
Inconsistency across browsers was one of the things that inspired the development of the various js libraries we use today, including jQuery. Despite the existence of standards (even standards with comprehensive test cases), they are needed to abstract away the differences between the IE, Firefox, Safari etc DOMs. If browsers were to embed a native implementation of jQuery, you'd then have to have some kind of meta-jQuery library to abstract away the differences between IE jQuery, Safari jQuery and Firefox jQuery (etc).