6 ms·
I think this would only be worthwhile if you could do this: <script src="http://jquery.js"></script>
by webXL 14y ago
I think this would only be worthwhile if you could do this:
<script src="http://jquery.js"></script>
- debacle 14y agoWhat would the source at js.js/js.js be?
- ozten 14y agoVery cool. You could also do: <script src="http://jquery.js/latest"></script> And keep / as an informative website.
- Zr40 14y agoYou can even drop the http: part, like this: <script src="//jquery.js/latest"></script>
- webXL 14y agoNah, too much typing. Maybe if you got rid of jquery.com. It's not even a company!
- slig 14y agoI can't tell if your you're joking or not. Linking to the latest version is a very nice way to break your app automatically.
- izak30 14y agoOr use Content-Type negotiation. (please note, I do understand that this proposal is basically DOA)
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y agoYou could quite easily make the index page the latest jquery minified version, so yes.
- kevincennis 14y agoThe WHATWG should just introduce a new <jquery> element that automatically pulls the latest version.
- docgnome 14y agoNot unless jquery is going to be absorbed into ECMAscript it shouldn't.
- kevincennis 14y ago<joke/>
- docgnome 14y agoAh. My bad.
- therandomguy 14y ago... because http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.7.2/jquery.min.js http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.7.2/jquery.min... is not cool enough
- derrida 14y agoI have a revolutionary idea: <script src="http://somedomainyoumanage/jquery.js></script> http://somedomainyoumanage/jquery.js></script> + git and save the 100K
- Raphael 14y ago<script src="/jquery.js></script>
- user-id 14y agoI'd much prefer this, much the same way http://to/ http://to/ used to operate: <script src="//cdn/jquery"></script>