click-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Malcolm Edgar <malcolm.ed...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: A very good Calendar replacement (MIT license)
Date Wed, 22 Apr 2009 06:23:07 GMT
I have written to the JSCalendar author about changing the GPL to a
dual license, but I haven't heard back so I presume this option is
dead in the water.

I think the two options we have going forward to bring back DateField
functionality.  These options are:

http://electronicholas.com/calendar

Pros:
* has time support

Cons:
* has prototype dependency, which can impact jquery code
* large JS includes

 http://jqueryui.com/demos/datepicker/

Pros:
* looks slick
* uses jquery library

Cons:
* has not time support
* large JS includes

Interested in everyones feedback

regards Malcolm Edgar

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 4:30 AM, florin.g <florin@bytenotes.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'm a jQuery guy. If I am forced to load prototype for the sake of a calendar, I'll have
to make do without the click-extra package. A popup calendar is the single most needed javascript
component and in my opinion it should be independent of any framework.
>
> Thanks to everyone for the good work.
>
>
> Joseph Schmidt wrote:
>>> Please note this is a Prototype based Calendar so its claim of only
>>> 20kb is incorrect. More likely 20kb + 115kb for Prototype.
>> But Prototype is already required by other Click controls, and
>> it's in extras anyway.
>
>
> Not saying not to include it. Just providing full disclosure and that
> we need to be careful with siding with a particular JS framework.
>
> For example if you include a Prototype control in your Page and want
> to use JQuery you are bound to run into incompatibility issues since
> Prototype have the bad practice of polluting Object. Also both
> frameworks bind the '$' character.
>
>
>> Besides, if you want to remove Prototype than another base library needs
>> to take it's place - e.g. jQuery(cause it's small enough compared to
>> other solutions) - it doesn't make sense to implement everything by hand.
>
>
> There are no plans of removing the Prototype controls however we need
> to be careful because we are forcing the Prototype framework onto users.
>
> My own feeling is that its better to host specific JS framework
> controls in ClickClick like was done with JQuery.
>
> regards
>
> bob
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/A-very-good-Calendar-replacement-%28MIT-license%29-tp2651408p2656713.html
> Sent from the click-development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Mime
View raw message