Now thats not true and even you must know that
Struggling to find a good HTML5/JavaScript developer.
- Thread starter numnutz
- Start date
Now thats not true and even you must know that
That's why I wouldn't employ them, if they don't have a understanding of the language they won't have taken into account performance across different platforms and all the other little quirks that JS has which jQuery alone does not solve.
Sure if all we are discussing is selecting a dom element and hiding it once or twice thats fine, but creating any form of scalable platform needs to know something about the language behind it.
Really it all depends on the product and target audience as to what skill set is needed.
One thing I do want to get across is that HTML5 is not a new language it's just HTML with some new semantic elements created based on what we have used consistently over the years.
Yes, there are some new elements adding (video, audio etc) but these alone are not HTML5 you could change the doctype on any HTML page and call it HTML5 doesn't mean you understand it
That's why I wouldn't employ them, if they don't have a understanding of the language they won't have taken into account performance across different platforms and all the other little quirks that JS has which jQuery alone does not solve.
Sure if all we are discussing is selecting a dom element and hiding it once or twice thats fine, but creating any form of scalable platform needs to know something about the language behind it.
Really it all depends on the product and target audience as to what skill set is needed.
One thing I do want to get across is that HTML5 is not a new language it's just HTML with some new semantic elements created based on what we have used consistently over the years.
Yes, there are some new elements adding (video, audio etc) but these alone are not HTML5 you could change the doctype on any HTML page and call it HTML5 doesn't mean you understand it
Yeah, I do keep hearing about the "new" html5 but for the most part its identical to to the html we have been writing for years. It only comes alive when coupled with javascript or jquery but jquery is very heavyweight if you don't need all its functionality. Web development is rife with fads and slightly wooly sounding technologies. Web 2.0 and ajax come to mind. They sound fancy to the uninitiated but there is nothing special about them.
Jquery is a do everything library that allows people that are not familiar with javascript to add in effects and animations with a minimum amount of fuss but if you are using it for a web app it starts to look a bit heavy and you will need a developer familiar with pure javascript.
Last edited:
Don't agree with you there, I would actually say the opposite.
Most sites abuse jQuery for adding basic interactions which can be achieved with just POJ or CSS, whereas a webapp is more likely to utilise the full ability of a framework although which is another story altogether
Err, nothing special about async javascript? It only changed the modern internet and all.
To the OP - you might try the Stack Overflow careers board. You have to pay to advertise and there'll be less front-end developers than backend developers, but I suspect they'll be much higher quality all round developers.
Last edited:
Think he was getting at the fact that it's a marketing buzzword to people outside of the industry. I mean good ol'XMLHttpRequest was alive and kicking way before any Marketeer jumped on the ajax bandwagon
True, but the 'ajax era' has totally changed the roadmaps of frameworks like ASP.NET and C#, the last two versions have really made a push toward async development and that's all come around because of the surge in ajax-ified (don't you just hate that term) websites. They were all possibly pre 2005, but it's in no way a fad, it's completely changed the last five years and the next ten years of software development.
Look at all the web based systems that are replacing common desktop software, Google Docs, MS Office 365/workspace and there'll only be more. They all rely on ajax related technologies.
Look at all the web based systems that are replacing common desktop software, Google Docs, MS Office 365/workspace and there'll only be more. They all rely on ajax related technologies.
Totally agree and things like Node.js are pushing it even further, it's the marketing side of the show I hate not the tech
Certainly so i've been running the UI/FED development of a large cloud storage provider for the last 4 years and its awesome to see how things have progressed. I personally think its due to the sudden popularity of mobile smartphones as webapps are a much more flexible platform than native.
Thats my point. It would be like hailing the ipod as a revolutionary music device years after it was released. Ajax has been around for years now and yet its still something that prospective companies like to add on their job requirements. Ajax isn't tricky so when you see a job asking for jQuery, ajax and web 2.0 I tend to write the company off as a bit of a wannabe.
As to jquery being heavyweight, I still stand by that. Look at the huge range of functionality it exposes and you will find everything that it implements can be found in different little libraries and plugins that allow you to keep the size of your javascript down.
Using tools like Ender allow you to minify and combine your libraries into a single file to keep requests at a minimum on both the number and size fronts.
I know that the google CDN helps out a lot but I still feel a little lazy when I use it these days.
As to jquery being heavyweight, I still stand by that. Look at the huge range of functionality it exposes and you will find everything that it implements can be found in different little libraries and plugins that allow you to keep the size of your javascript down.
Using tools like Ender allow you to minify and combine your libraries into a single file to keep requests at a minimum on both the number and size fronts.
I know that the google CDN helps out a lot but I still feel a little lazy when I use it these days.
My favorite is when people ask for "jQuery & JavaScript" as separate requirements. I often have to hold myself from responding when I see those come through.
True with any external lib, it all comes down to the requirements and maintainability. jQuery has a huge plugin culture which is exactly why everyone jumps on it, as you can find anything you need somewhere.
It will be interesting to see where they go from 1.7 onwards as they are looking to slim-down the lib as it has become very bloated due to its backwards compatibility.
Again each lib has its advantages and disadvantages, i've not had a chance to play with Ender yet but its modular nature alone makes it extremely powerful and one I will be looking to utilise in the future.
Nothing lazy with using a CDN, much simpler for you and in the long run better for users. I also use cdnjs.com for some of the lesser known libs.
Btw if like me you use jQuery mainly for it syntax (come on it's nice
) then check out zeptojs.com it follows jQuery syntax but is massively reduced in size as it only supports WebKit based browsers.I've been meaning to have a look at zepto for a while now but haven't got round to it. Lately i've been mucking about with backbone.js which is fantastic and they give the choice of jquery or zepto so I really should give it a go, I have just been too busy on php work.
I don't have any issues with CDN's for libraries, quite the opposite in fact. The widespread use of jquery across so many common sites means that the CDN based delivery is a must in my view. That sentence was meant to contain 2 separate points but it wasn't very clear, I was saying that CDN's help the issue but I still feel like I am using a sledgehammer to hit a nail most of the time.
I think the future of libraries will be much more modular and flexible with more emphasis placed on the interactivity and extensibility of the library. Its amazing how quickly the web is developing now and the sky is literally the limit. The sharing of resources is fantastic and allows us to deliver amazing sites at a fraction of the cost a similar site would have been pre "javascript renaissance".
I don't have any issues with CDN's for libraries, quite the opposite in fact. The widespread use of jquery across so many common sites means that the CDN based delivery is a must in my view. That sentence was meant to contain 2 separate points but it wasn't very clear, I was saying that CDN's help the issue but I still feel like I am using a sledgehammer to hit a nail most of the time.
I think the future of libraries will be much more modular and flexible with more emphasis placed on the interactivity and extensibility of the library. Its amazing how quickly the web is developing now and the sky is literally the limit. The sharing of resources is fantastic and allows us to deliver amazing sites at a fraction of the cost a similar site would have been pre "javascript renaissance".
"the fad" was the phrase "web 2.0" - using asynchronous javascript isn't/wasn't.
For a number of years in the earlier 2000's you couldn't read a single blog/article/job advert that was related to the web without "Web 2.0" being in it somewhere. It was utterly annoying.
Yeh the web 2.0 idea was a flop, i don't think anyone acually got what it was all about.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 15,743
- Location
- The land of milk & beans
That was the problem. It wasn't really about anything. It was an esoteric term which was primarily meant to describe the increase in user interaction-focused websites.
Instead it was attached to every design which had rounded edges and gradients by know-nothing marketers and technical managers who really should have known better.
Instead it was attached to every design which had rounded edges and gradients by know-nothing marketers and technical managers who really should have known better.