Talk:List of JavaScript libraries

Do we need this?

There already is Category:JavaScript libraries; is this page really necessary? -Shai-kun 03:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would be interested not so much in a pure list which, as you indicate, can simply be accessed through the category, but in a comparison like this. It would help people make an informed decision.--Adoniscik (talk) 02:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with List of web application frameworks#JavaScript

I did not propose the merge, but I agree that something needs to be merged. I think there is some overlap between these two sections, and one or the other should be deleted and redirect to the other. The only question in my mind is whether JavaScript libraries deserve their own listing or not. There are some unique properties of JavaScript libraries (there seems to be quite a lot, and they run entirely in clients, they have unique programming challenges) that makes me feel that there should be a separate page, but I'd like to hear if there are other opinions before I merge them. I will add some merge notices to encourage discussion.Ian Bailey 16:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split: IMO, split existing JavaScript libraries out of list of web application frameworks due to their conceptual differences. Unlike server-side frameworks, they don't directly access databases, don't use static templates but rather build the UI dynamically, they rarely have a concept of session management and they have a completely different security model. The articles should probably link to each other in their lead section though. I've been thinking of splitting these before, but haven't made an effort to do anything about it. -- intgr ^#%@! 18:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split: Agree with points made by intgr. Bilge [T C] 10:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, client side Javascript libraries are NOT web application frameworks and should not be in this section - Michael

Yes I agree and to have merged them is incorrect. Please fix. - AustraliaFelix —Preceding unsigned comment added by Australiafelix (talk • contribs) 04:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flex/Flash is one of the main Web Application Frameworks, and it's definitely not a Javascript library. It could be that the JS library is a subset of this though - I'm not familiar enough with them to know. -Brian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.90.185 (talk) 19:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lkcl: Pyjamas, RubyJS/rwt and Google Web Toolkit are NOT javascript libraries, they are javascript compilers plus DOM-model manipulation libraries plus Widget set libraries. if you want to see a good example of how to break down pages, see these: http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebProgramming http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebFrameworks http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebBrowserProgramming

Agree to split - There are plans to merged into Comparison of web application frameworks, this split should be done BEFORE the merge is completed. --Hm2k (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

php.js

Hi,

I'm involved with the php.js library (not the owner but a main developer), and think php.js has the user base to be considered noteworthy, but I'm not sure whether editing the article is permitted at Wikipedia by someone involved with the project... Thank you... 116.77.140.245 (talk) 08:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The notability criteria requires multiple independent published sources. And yeah, WP:COI says that you shouldn't edit articles about things you're directly involved in. But if it's notable, someone will probably write an article sooner or later. -- intgr [talk] 18:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI doesn't actually prohibit contributions from those directly involved. It says this is a no, no "unless you are certain that a neutral editor would agree that your edits improve Wikipedia". So disclose your conflict and give us the facts.MartinRinehart (talk) 11:19, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will the Real Notable Libraries Please Stand Up?

I'm trying to write a book chapter re JavaScript libraries. This would be a logical place to start a list of same, no?

Could we define "JavaScript library"?

Could we define "notable"?

A comparison of functionalities of notable JavaScript libraries would be most welcome. MartinRinehart (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]