Alternative jQuery Documentation
jqapi.com
jqapi.com
But, maybe it's just the way I work; I can understand that other developers might prefer to have a great resource that they can look up instead of randomly searching google.
I guess an unofficial jquery plugin website where you could easily:
1- Find a couple of plugin that do what you want
2- Let you try the demo as fast as possible
3- Let you glance over the code, see comments and rating of others developers.
4- Have an easy and clear: Crash 30 sec installation
5- Give an access to the documentation.
The plugins though are a mess. Any category I click on seems to have a huge list of options, some of which are great and some of which are sort of half finished and abandoned. Even if anyone could submit anything for display on the site, it might be nice to have an additional organizational layer on top that only shows a curated set of plugins. I just find something like http://www.ruby-toolbox.com/ easier to browse through. I think most of the organizational concepts between the sites are the same, but there just seems to be less cruft there.
This works on the Chrome Extensions website, you quickly skip over the unmaintained plugins and the ones with no reviews. https://chrome.google.com/webstore?hl=en&category=ext
What if you could download a "Google for JavaScript" where, based on lots of javascript developers query, you downloaded a cached version of the results and the websites?
I.e. It's easy to get the top 100000 queries containing javascript; you get the top20 links for every queries, you download those websites and compress that. I don't know how big that'd be. I'm sure it'd be possible to use that in a clever way and make it small enough to be easy downloadable. A couple of gigs.. what's that for today?
Give me a list. Of everything.
Or, if you absolutely feel you have to categorize things, give me a single "Uncollapse this mess" button so that I can look for the thing I'm looking for.
</sarcasm>
That would make no sense to have a list of 1000 random items not being categorized; just use the search.
When you say "To use the search, I need to know what I'm looking for". Well, usually, when you search the documentation, it's because you know what you're searching for.. right?
But then, I get that you might not know the "best keywords" to search what you're looking for. And, for that, it's so better to have smart category rather than a list of 1000 items.
I mean, you're searching a way to post things using Ajax. You can search for ajax, you can search for post.. but you can quickly look at the categories and see Ajax; and then, instead of browsing through 1000 items, you only have to read a dozen.
I have been in such positions when learning JSF, seemingly simple things like getting out a request parameter where not obvious, and when googling "request parameter JSF" and all kinds of tricks I still did not get a satisfying answer, only after reading more about JSF I realized it is just the wrong thing to do any way.
If you're in such a position, you dont know what to search for but you think you have a problem, then it is time to pick up a book and study.
Should be valid html. Back button is broken. There should be a home button top left. The colours need tweaking for contrast, and I'm guessing other accessability tweaks.
url search does not work. For example the url: http://jqapi.com/ajax returns 404. Really it should do a search for ajax and take me to that page or list search results.
Am I alone in thinking this is a rather dated viewpoint?
What's wrong with valid HTML?
Browsers tend to have very little problem rendering invalid markup, and the savings costs associated with invalid markup (bandwidth, time, etc.) are very easily enumerated. So I would pose you this question:
What's wrong with invalid HTML, besides lack of some enigmatic adherence to idealism?
> and the savings costs associated with invalid markup
> (bandwidth, time, etc.) are very easily enumerated.
Say, how would invalid markup help http://kod.as/lab/valid/ be even smaller? Sure, that is pretty meaningless document, but take a look at a source and you will see some stuff that can be applied to normal sites. It's valid: http://validator.nu/?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fkod.as%2Flab%2Fvalid%2... http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fkod.as%2Flab%...
You could remove DOCTYPE (which is very short compared to HTML4 or XHTML versions), but then you'd throw your browsers to quirks mode, and that is a pain. The whole purpose of DOCTYPE in HTML5 is to force standards-compliant rendering mode, that's it.
And it only looks that browsers have little problems parsing invalid markup. Making sense of tag soup parsing (and making it consistent) was one of the major tasks for HTML5 people.
I am very visual and my favorite JQuery documentation is http://visualjquery.com/
For the same reason I was best able to learn about using jQuery by using the sites here: http://www.readwriteweb.com/hack/2010/11/learning-javascript...
* Neither the ToC nor the content pane scroll. * Clicking a method link in the ToC pops up the keyboard which quickly gets annoying.
I tried to leave feedback, but e User Voice overlay is also horridly broken on the iPad.
It lets you quickly view how a particular jQuery function/method works.
This is the nicest documentation of any language I've ever used. The page loads, the cursor defaults to the search box, you type in what you are looking for and the browser hides searches that do not match and then you can use the arrow keys to go up and down then list to the one you want.
As for the problem trying to find "is" just type "is(" if you are looking for the method itself.
I instinctively tried to press RIGHT instead of ENTER to open category, and LEFT to close category.
Visual jQuery used to be my go to resource for years, until it became woefully out of date.
done.
It's kind of hard to be a functional JQuery developer with JavaScript turned off all the time. It's like being a blind tour guide or a celibate porn star.