JavaScript library for iGoogle homepage effect

[n 179911]

Hi,

Is there any JavaScript library which allow me to create iGoogle home
page effect?
* split the page in 2 columns
* drag a div from 1 column and drop it to 2nd column
* automatically shift the div in 1st column up
* automatically shit the div in 2nd column down

Thank you for any tip

 

[Matt Kruse]

Is there any JavaScript library which allow me to create iGoogle home
page effect?

There may be code out there specific to this task. I did a quick proof-
of-concept using jQuery and some of the UI libraries:
http://www.javascripttoolbox.com/temp/layout/layout.html

The individual files are here:
http://www.javascripttoolbox.com/temp/layout/

It has hooks in it to insert AJAX calls to persist the portal state on
the server side.

Hope it helps,

Matt Kruse

 

[Michael J. Ryan]

Is there any JavaScript library which allow me to create iGoogle home
page effect?
* split the page in 2 columns
* drag a div from 1 column and drop it to 2nd column
* automatically shift the div in 1st column up
* automatically shit the div in 2nd column down

This has been done with jQueryUI, YUI, extjs, dojo, and many others.

The client-side is easy, maintaining state takes even more knowledge.

 

[David Mark]

There may be code out there specific to this task. I did a quick proof-
of-concept using jQuery and some of the UI libraries:http://www.javascripttoolbox.com/temp/layout/layout.html

You would. Have you learned nothing over the last few years? Still
relying on jQuery when you know it is a piece of crap. Oh, that's
right; without jQuery there would be no software. Something like
that, right?

The individual files are here:http://www.javascripttoolbox.com/temp/layout/

Who cares? Why advertise your lack of proficiency and understanding
of browser scripting? It makes you look like a colossal fool.

It has hooks in it to insert AJAX calls to persist the portal state on
the server side.
Pfft.


Hope it helps,

Nope (as usual.)

 

[Matt Kruse]

You would.  Have you learned nothing over the last few years?

I have indeed. I learned that I could make a proof-of-concept like the
above in less than an hour of coding, that it works for my needs, and
that this allowed me to focus on other things. +1! WIN!

 Still relying on jQuery when you know it is a piece of crap.

s/is a piece of crap/has flaws/

HTH!

Matt Kruse

 

[David Mark]

I have indeed. I learned that I could make a proof-of-concept like the

Anything running on top of jQuery is *highly* suspect as a proof of
anything.

above in less than an hour of coding, that it works for my needs, and
that this allowed me to focus on other things. +1! WIN!

How about this? I could write that whole miserable jQuery mess in a
week. You've had years.

s/is a piece of crap/has flaws/

Has very obvious and critical flaws at its lowest levels. But you
know this.

HTH!

Not a chance.

 

[Matt Kruse]

How about this?  I could write that whole miserable jQuery mess in a
week.  You've had years.

If I had a week I could probably do the same. I'd love to have a week
to work on it. Care to pay me?!

You seem to have the impression that my work mostly revolves around
js. That would be cool, but in reality it's a very minor part of what
I do most of the time. It's just an interest of mine.

Matt Kruse

 

[David Mark]

If I had a week I could probably do the same. I'd love to have a week
to work on it. Care to pay me?!

In all of these years, you couldn't spare a week to save yourself tons
of future time and aggravation (not to mention embarrassment?) Poor
planning on your part does not constitute an emergency for me (and why
the hell would I pay you to solve your own problems?)

You seem to have the impression that my work mostly revolves around
js. That would be cool, but in reality it's a very minor part of what
I do most of the time. It's just an interest of mine.

All BS. If you've got time to write articles, widgets, etc., then you
have time to write whatever library you need. You obviously wouldn't
need everything in jQuery. Ironic that you've had a much better
library staring you in the face for *years*, but you prefer to
complain about the documentation. That's just silly, especially given
the interactive "console" on the test page and the very jQuery-like
(and optional) OO interface. You seem afflicted by the same bug as
the rest of the jQuery mavens (i.e. if something isn't marketed down
your throat, you can't see it.) Or maybe you prefer getting "answers"
from other users as opposed to the author of the script. Or perhaps
you are just unwilling to admit that you were wrong about virtually
everything. Whatever.

 

[Matt Kruse]

In all of these years
2?

, you couldn't spare a week

Not really, because it's not at that level of importance to me. I
certainly have had more important things to worry about.

to save yourself tons
of future time and aggravation (not to mention embarrassment?)

I've yet to experience tons of aggravation, embarassment, or lost
time. So why would I spend time re-writing something that is
functioning just fine for me?

All BS.  If you've got time to write articles, widgets, etc., then you
have time to write whatever library you need.  

Why would I write a library if the one I am using is doing just fine?

You obviously wouldn't need everything in jQuery.

And I don't use a lot of it now.

 Ironic that you've had a much better
library staring you in the face for *years*, but you prefer to
complain about the documentation.

Because much of what I do is not writing code myself, but giving
groups of developers tools and frameworks to write code. Your library
is a poor candidate for that, as are others.

Or perhaps
you are just unwilling to admit that you were wrong about virtually
everything.  Whatever.

Nah. I think I've had a pretty good view of things all along. jQuery
has a number of flaws, some of which I didn't realize until later.
Nevertheless, it continues to work well for what I use it for, and I
still consider it the best solution in the cases when I've used it.
I'm pretty sure that every metric I could use to measure its success
or failure would point to it being a big success. If I ever build a
public web site that I want to work with all browsers and be more
robust, I will most likely not use jQuery.

This seems personal to you. You seem very interested in my personal
opinions on jQuery and the fact that I use it and recommend it. I'm
not sure why.

Matt Kruse

 

[David Mark]

2?

Dunno, I've known of most of these issues for over a decade. Yeah,
it's been about two since you popped up to plug jQuery and were proven
foolish.

Not really, because it's not at that level of importance to me.

Seems like you do a lot of browser scripting (for better or worse.)

I
certainly have had more important things to worry about.

Your problems are your own.

I've yet to experience tons of aggravation, embarassment, or lost
time. So why would I spend time re-writing something that is
functioning just fine for me?

I'm through trying to enlighten you. You are a lost cause. I won't
let you spread your poison in here though.

Why would I write a library if the one I am using is doing just fine?

See above.

And I don't use a lot of it now.

And how stupid is that? You can't even upgrade the thing at this
point. Whatever work you've done with the old version(s) (or your own
private hacked version) has a near future expiration date.

Because much of what I do is not writing code myself, but giving
groups of developers tools and frameworks to write code. Your library
is a poor candidate for that, as are others.

I think you are a poor candidate to make such decisions.

Nah. I think I've had a pretty good view of things all along. jQuery

You think a lot of things.

has a number of flaws, some of which I didn't realize until later.
Understated.

Nevertheless, it continues to work well for what I use it for, and I
still consider it the best solution in the cases when I've used it.

You are deluded.

I'm pretty sure that every metric I could use to measure its success
or failure would point to it being a big success.

For being sure, you sound pretty unsure of yourself.

If I ever build a
public web site that I want to work with all browsers and be more
robust, I will most likely not use jQuery.

I figured you'd never built a Website; yet, somehow you think it
appropriate to recommend jQuery to those who do.

This seems personal to you. You seem very interested in my personal
opinions on jQuery and the fact that I use it and recommend it. I'm
not sure why.

You don't know me at all. I don't care whose name is on the post (it
is the content that matters.)