jQuery Forum

To clarify I'm suggesting the following:
src/dimensions.js
- width
- height
- innerWidth
- innerHeight
- OuterWidth
- innerHeight
src/offset.js
- offset
- position
- offsetParent
- scrollTop
- scrollLeft
--
Brandon Aaron

What kind of filesize increases are we likely to see from integrating
scrollTop/Left, position and offsetParent? At this point I almost
wonder if it's irrelevant - it's a frequent dependency and is likely
to become part of core anyway.
--John

Basically 1k minified and obviously less once gzipped.
--
Brandon Aaron

On Apr 22, 2008, at 4:58 AM, John Resig

jQuery's file size is gradually increasing - originally was about 15k without gzipping.
I wonder if a jQuery lite would have appeal for anyone? jQuery with just node selection/traversing, events and CSS (i.e. take out ajax, animation and positioning (not all pages involving finding where elements are located)). I'm assuming if you know Ant you could do this yourself, but a web based build tool could be good (maybe even integrate some plugins, like the form one)
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 22/04/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">Mika Tuupola</b> <<a href="mailto:tuupola@appelsiini.net">tuupola@appelsiini.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">

On Apr 22, 2008, at 4:58 AM, John Resig wrote:

> What kind of filesize increases are we likely to see from integrating
> scrollTop/Left, position and offsetParent? At this point I almost
> wonder if it's irrelevant - it's a frequent dependency and is likely
> to become part of core anyway.



Agreed. Would like to see it in core too.

--
Mika Tuupola
<a href="http://www.appelsiini.net/">http://www.appelsiini.net/</a>

Actually I think it would be better to leave the width/height methods within the core since they are basically required. That way dimensions.js and offset.js could be optionally included.
--
Brandon Aaron

FWIW: Perhaps a builder similar to how the other libraries deal with
their components is in order? One day it could even integrate UI into
the packaging, that way a kitchen sink version is always available and
folks can custom package it as needed. This would also allow for the
custom packing to utilize a variety of compressions, obfuscations,
etc. - whatever the user wanted.
I think interface used to do this, but for another example
http://mootools.net/download . There are others too, I'm just too
lazy to go collecting links.
Pax,
- Stan

It would be good if it could be built directly from SVN (so you could choose your version, or even go with the latest development version). Although maybe that would add too much overhead (could caching be used server side)?
Also on the subject of filesize, how big is jQuery when YUI Compressor is used on it?
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 22/04/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">Stan Lemon</b> <<a href="mailto:stanlemon@mac.com">stanlemon@mac.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
FWIW: Perhaps a builder similar to how the other libraries deal with
their components is in order?  One day it could even integrate UI into
the packaging, that way a kitchen sink version is always available and
folks can custom package it as needed.  This would also allow for the
custom packing to utilize a variety of compressions, obfuscations,
etc. - whatever the user wanted.

I think interface used to do this, but for another example
<a href="http://mootools.net/download">http://mootools.net/download</a> .  There are others too, I'm just too
lazy to go collecting links.

Pax,

- Stan


On Apr 22, 7:39 am, "Sam Collett" <<a href="mailto:sam.coll...@gmail.com">sam.coll...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:
> jQuery's file size is gradually increasing - originally was about 15k
> without gzipping.
>
> I wonder if a jQuery lite would have appeal for anyone? jQuery with just
> node selection/traversing, events and CSS (i.e. take out ajax, animation and
> positioning (not all pages involving finding where elements are located)).
> I'm assuming if you know Ant you could do this yourself, but a web based
> build tool could be good (maybe even integrate some plugins, like the form
> one)
>

> On 22/04/2008, Mika Tuupola <<a href="mailto:tuup...@appelsiini.net">tuup...@appelsiini.net</a>> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 22, 2008, at 4:58 AM, John Resig wrote:
>
> > > What kind of filesize increases are we likely to see from integrating
> > > scrollTop/Left, position and offsetParent? At this point I almost
> > > wonder if it's irrelevant - it's a frequent dependency and is likely
> > > to become part of core anyway.
>
> > Agreed. Would like to see it in core too.
>
> > --
> > Mika Tuupola
> ><a href="http://www.appelsiini.net/">http://www.appelsiini.net/</a>

Brandon Aaron schrieb:

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Jörn Zaefferer <<a href="mailto:Enchos@gmx.net">Enchos@gmx.net</a>> wrote:

On Apr 22, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Stan Lemon

+1

Just to follow-up ... are we all on board with moving dimensions into the core as specified below? If so I'll go ahead and commit.
--
Brandon Aaron

I think so - I'd say ping John for a final word, then go for it :)

It is done in Rev. 5345. Still need to move over some more units tests from dimensions for the offset methods and window/document dimensions.
Paul you might need to include dimensions.js within the UI demos/tests.
--
Brandon Aaron

Any ideas on the best way to merge the documentation with the core docs? <a href="http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/dimensions">http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/dimensions</a>
Are we maintaing docs for each version?
--
Brandon Aaron

Brandon Aaron schrieb:

Agreed ... I believe John mentioned possibly bumping to 1.3 also.
--
Brandon Aaron

Awesome! :)
--
Ariel Flesler
http://flesler.blogspot.com

So, the upcoming jQuery has everything from Dimensions? If yes, that's
awesome!
Sincerely,
William Chang
http://www.creativecrew.org

Yes. :)
--
Brandon Aaron