Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #16037

Re: Libraries

Followups directed to: comp.lang.javascript

Show all headers | View raw

Scott Sauyet wrote:

> But this is not the main support forum for those libraries.  Another
> recent thread, titled "How to create timelapse animation consisting of
> several or more images?", with content that starts "Is there any
> tutorials about this?  Does jQuery ui have a plug-in built already to
> do this?" is inappropriate for several reasons, among which is that if
> the poster wants to know how to do something like this with jQuery,
> the appropriate place to ask is in a jQuery-focused group.

The only problem I have with this is that (AFAIK) there is no jQuery-focused 
*newsgroup* on *Usenet*; there is (only?) a jQuery-focused *Google* group, 
which is a different animal.
 
> That line is important.  This group should not be the first stop for
> determining how to use one of these libraries, not even JSX,
> MyLibrary, APE, vxJS, or others written by regulars.  But more
> detailed discussions of the libraries should be welcomed.  Would that
> be a reasonable stance?

Given that the authors of the mentioned libraries are regulars here, I do 
not see why how to use them should not be discussed here.  Certainly you do 
not expect each of them to build their own support chain?

I second your notion about the newsgroup not being the first stop, though.  
There are source code comments, there may be an API documentation, even a 
manual, and certainly there is Web search.  But if there is raising 
interest, it becomes impractical for an author to answer all the same 
questions repeatedly via private e-mail, so avoiding that via a public forum 
like this newsgroup appears not to be such a bad idea.  And if the library 
is to improve, would it not be better if was made known to the public and 
stood public scrutiny?  (You may have noticed that I am following this 
approach with JSX.)

I would like to compare this approach to my (arguably short) experience with 
de.comp.text.tex.  There is a LaTeX document class optimized for Central-
European formats (basically), KOMA-Script by Markus Kohm (which I had the 
privilege to use in my thesis).  Occasionally, when there is a problem with 
using KOMA-Script, Markus – who apparently has the same mindset regarding 
*luser* support that I do, so he's not a suspect ;-) – jumps in there and 
can quickly point out the culprit or gets ideas on how to improve KOMA-
Script.  And apparently nobody there finds anything wrong with that.  It is 
healthy and it is sort of expected, with no obligations to anyone.

IMHO, the problems really only begin when support for free is perceived as 
an obligation.

> And I certainly would not back down from the FAQ's statement that no
> javascript libraries are endorsed by this group.

The FAQ really is a different can of worms altogether.  But at this point, 
the statement in the FAQ remains somewhat correct, if imprecise: It should 
state instead that no *particular* library is endorsed by *all* *regular* 
contributors to the newsgroup.  In that sense, I would suggest to list and 
link to the libraries and frameworks written by regulars (you mentioned 
them) as well as other ones, which helps people to make an *informed* 
decision.


PointedEars
-- 
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
    navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
    && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
)  // Plone, register_function.js:16

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2012-09-17 11:23 -0700
  Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? "S.T." <anon@anon.com> - 2012-09-17 13:52 -0700
    Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-18 08:36 +1000
      Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? "S.T." <anon@anon.com> - 2012-09-17 16:24 -0700
        Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-09-17 20:29 -0700
        Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? Adam Silver <adambsilver@gmail.com> - 2012-09-19 00:48 -0700
          Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? "S.T." <anon@anon.com> - 2012-09-19 12:43 -0700
            Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-09-20 11:09 -0700
      Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-09-17 20:21 -0700
      Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-18 16:49 +0200
        Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-09-18 12:49 -0700
      Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? "Scott Sauyet" <3103invalid@webnews.fastusenet.org> - 2012-09-19 12:29 +0000
        Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-09-19 05:44 -0700
          Libraries (was: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest?) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-20 02:57 +0200
            Re: Libraries (was: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest?) David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-09-19 18:14 -0700
            Re: Libraries (was: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest?) Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-09-20 07:26 -0700
              Re: Libraries Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-20 17:27 +0200
                Re: Libraries Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-09-20 10:48 -0700
        Re: How difficult would it be to create simple autosuggest? "S.T." <anon@anon.com> - 2012-09-19 12:00 -0700

csiph-web