JQuery wins "Open Source Application of the Year" award

[httpwebwitch]

Let me offer my congratulations to JQuery for winning .net magazine's "Open Source Application of the Year" award.
Quite an accomplishment, considering they were up against Firefox and Wordpress.

source: http://blog.jquery.com/2009/12/03/jquery-wins-net-magazine-award/ [blog.jquery.com]

Perhaps this win should not be so surprising. Both FF and WP are well-known open-source projects with huge followings, and in a way they're both old news. Neither has been immune to harsh criticism in the past year, FireFox for it's recent bloatware-like performance, and WordPress for their ubiquitous security problems. But JQuery? It's really hard to say any thing bad about JQuery.

btw, Wordpress won last year.

Kudos to Rey Bango (JQuery Blogger) for acknowledging some of the other very fine JS frameworks in their space:

I think the impact of this reaches further than just the jQuery project and validates how important well-managed JavaScript frameworks such as jQuery, Dojo, MooTools et al. have become to application development.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

High fives to everyone on the JQuery team, and to everyone who has contributed to it!

[Fotiman]

Personally, I'm a little disappointed that there is no mention of YUI, especially given the radical new YUI 3 released in Sept.

But congrats to jQuery. :)

[Receptional Andy]

It's really hard to say any thing bad about JQuery

I agree, jquery is a thoroughly excellent piece of work - just the right blend of features and simplicity.

[rocknbil]

My only problem with jQuery, and will probably remain to be so, is that now people who don't give a rolling $^$%^$%%^ about accessibility are perpetuating their uber coolness by using it and still not creating accessible links. I know you can do this, I know it's not a problem in jQuery itself, it's how it's implemented, but I see even more href="javascript:void(0)" with jQuery than I ever did with old school plain Jane JS.

[httpwebwitch]

rocknbil, I agree - inaccessibility caused by client-side shenanigans is a plague currently infecting the entire web. I know the language and the tools aren't to blame, but ... if you build handguns, and you let everyone have a handgun for free, people are going to get hurt. You can not blame the gun manufacturer, but it's not hard to see that there's a clear cause and effect predicated by the existance of the weapons.

Woah. That's a heavy metaphor you can chew on for a while, eh.

Now that I've been using these frameworks for a few years, I can't imagine developing a JS-empowered app without them. I found myself in a situation that needed "element.getElementById()" a few days ago, and felt eerie, like typing <font> or <img src="spacer.gif">.

[Receptional Andy]

My experience is different, rocknbil. I remember javascript as a horrible concoction that rendered most websites unusable to me, and made me wonder what the point of javascript was. These days, I see a much greater number of sites using javascript creatively, as an added layer.

As a javascript disabler, the biggest problem I encounter is websites that require javascript for form submissions. And yet, I can make a POST form GET and submit it without js. ASP.NET, I'm pointing my finger in your direction ;)

[SuzyUK]

Well done!

I have been singing it's praises for a wee while now in CSS, even though I'm not a JS person I'm with Andy. it's just the right blend and I too remember the unusable JS websites :o.

John Resig and the team deserve lots of recognition for this, it makes it easy to fit the JS requirements into your web learning curve :)

[rocknbil]

These days, I see a much greater number of sites using javascript creatively, as an added layer.

Spend one day browsing your favorite sites with JS off and see how you feel. :-)

Sorry to sound like I'm pooing on JQuery, I'm really not, it's an awesome tool.

[AjiNIMC]

What?

Only 9.5 out of 10 people are using it (atleast the ones I know) and they are singing its praises. It was expected I guess.

[poppyrich]

jQuery gives me hope on the days when I say to myself, "This lack of consistency is unsustainable. Web technology is a dead-end."
Congrats to John Resig and all involved.

[bhonda]

JQuery was mentioned in a meeting a couple of days ago, and although I'd heard of it, I had never played around with it.

This morning I looked into it, and had a bit of a play.

This afternoon I read this thread, and find it's won an award.

I see this as a sign.

[tonynoriega]

why is it so many say (or blame) jquery/javascript for inaccessability issues?

dont 90-95% of users have js turned on?

[Tommybs]

The problem itself does not lie with jQuery (IMO). It makes it easier for a lot of people to add these effects to their sites and install numerous plugins, but it is up to the developer to ensure that everything works when js is disabled. Graceful degredation. It's mentioned on the jQuery site and in a number of books, jQuery should be used to enhance existing functionality not replace it, the same goes for any javascript. If you're in a controlled environment and know your users then do what you want. The thing is many people use it to change the default behaviour, not enhance it. You should only manipulate what you've created. The whole accessibilty issue is down to developers, not the javscript ( library or not ) that they decide to use. But then again, how many of the so called big players ignore this? Have any of you tried using Facebook without js on?

It all boils down to getting standards for everybody to use. Unfortunately there just isn't a strict enough governing body for the web to enforce this and too many developers just ignore the accessibility issues entirely. You just have to hope that enough people visit sites like this and read these discussions and take them on board.

[rocknbil]

Well put, to which I will only add . . .

Developers and clients alike tend to forget the fundamental premise of the Internet, to distribute information to everyone, regardless of environment or disabilities. I say developers and clients alike because clients - he/she who has the dollar - train us as developers to focus on presentation alone, this is why we're paying you. impress "me" - because I know what my visitors will want, which is not often the case.

So many developers get it backwards, and justify their decisions with statements like "90% of people have Javascript on anyway" (not picking on you, just using it as an example.) 10% of billions is a lot of people to eliminate.

I apologize for turning this away from a celebration of jQuery's award, it really is a magnificent tool to add to your arsenal. Just develop your applications so they work first without it . . . then enhance the app with jQuery. :-)

[tamasn]

Great tool!