Re: Questions about libx

[ more LibX technology discussion - I'm writing separate emails for
different issues. ]

On 4/28/06, Jeremy Dunck <jdunck@...> wrote:
>
> things at work here.  There's the perception of GM's fragility and in
> that sense, I think LibX is really in the same ballpark.  You're still
> depending on DOM manipulation on a known tree-- you're just less
> likely to break since OPAC upgrades are few and far between.  A user
> script coded against an OPAC would be similarly stable.  ;-)
>

I disagree to a point.  DOM-dependent web localization is just one
aspect of LibX that has this degree of fragility, the other aspects do
not. OpenURL is a standard around 5 years or so, and library's don't
change their ILS providers more than once a year.

Currently, for instance, in LibX 1.0.2, the New York Times cue is
broken because the Times changed their book review layout. But this
does not mean LibX is broken.

> The second thing is that you're making a domain-specific page
> modifier, and (as I hope I've made clear) I think that's useful.
> (I also think it'd be nice if an library-related code library came out
> of this.  Dealing with the various OPAC flavors, xISBN, OpenURL, and
> COiNS could, I think, be usefully abstracted for extensions other than
> LibX.)
>

The OpenURL access, the catalog support are written in separate .js
files using relatively clean classes & objects. The OpenURL part even
uses programming-by-difference inheritance. The only grave deficiency
is the global namespace issue.

 - Godmar
_______________________________________________
Libx mailing list
Libx@...
http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/libx