Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Split off AMD? (was Re: [CommonJS] New amd-implement list)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Tom Trenka  
View profile  
 More options May 17 2011, 4:10 pm
From: Tom Trenka <ttre...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 13:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Tues, May 17 2011 4:10 pm
Subject: Re: Split off AMD? (was Re: [CommonJS] New amd-implement list)
I am a long-time lurker and not a commentator, so take this as you
will.  That being said:

> I see AMD as a subset of CommonJS. I do not need to load individual
> modules into the browser as my primary criteria.

*You* may not need to load individual modules because you are focused
on the server, but that happens to be the primary use and need at the
moment (i.e. within a client).  I can entirely appreciate JS-on-the-
server (that is where I learned JS primarily) but at the same time you
can't just ignore the primary usage in favor of your own efforts,
efforts with Node (/me golf claps) notwithstanding.

I would almost (not quite, but almost) suggest that if you are going
to use the moniker "CommonJS", then you *might* consider interop when
it comes to server and client workings--including scripting in such
Adobe products as Acrobat. It seems to me that the spirit of the
CommonJS effort is to attempt to unify the use of the language on
*various* platforms, not just the server.  If your real interest is in
the work that you do on a normal basis, that's ok...but don't dismiss
the efforts that others (LOTS of others) are trying to do/have to do
simply based on your own interests.

The point of creating the AMD list is to remove the noise from this
one because there's some real practical efforts under way in working
out the kinks, based on server needs and client-based needs.  I'm glad
that you approve of not having more noise but I'm saddened by the idea
that you would be promoting something "common" without clearly
considering how JS has been primarily used in the past 8 years.  If
you seriously want this to be "Common", then don't dismiss browser-
based efforts.  If you don't, however, then I'd humbly suggest you
consider revisiting the name of the current effort.

Regards--
Tom Trenka

PS. Christoph: my apologies, I am not targeting you personally.  I've
been a lurker on this list for quite some time, and I have been
dismayed more than once by the "server prejudice" that has been
displayed.  Your message kind of pushed me over the edge a bit (to the
point where I felt I finally needed to engage) but that in no way
reflects a viewpoint of the work you may or may not have done.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.