[LibX] Questions about libx

Project LibX libx.org at gmail.com
Fri Apr 28 11:23:03 EDT 2006

Hi Jeremy--

"Maybe I'm unusual in being a patron at 4-5 libraries?"

I am usually a patron and/or affiliated with more than one library at any
given time.  We're aware that many people are using more than one library at
a time... ie if they are a student they may use their school library and the
local public library.

"Oh, has LibX been around long?  I had the impression that it was new.
How long was VTBar before becoming LibX?"

VTBar was first developed last summer (2005) and became LibX last fall.

We're planning a code clean-up soon... if there are better ways to address
the namespace issue we'll take that into account.


On 4/28/06, Jeremy Dunck <jdunck at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/28/06, Godmar Back <godmar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > LibX is for people using a library who frequently need access to that
> > library's resources: students, professors, and the general public.
> OK, it wasn't clear to me that the site is largely directed at
> librarians interested in packaging an edition for their patrons.
> > > I can see that libx is useful, but I don't have a strong affiliation
> > > with any particular library.
> ...
> > We felt that an extension that supports a community of library users
> > should be offered by that community's library.
> >
> > That said, since LibX is open source, developers can add this
> > functionality if they wish. In addition, end users can create their
> > own editions without consulting with their library.
> The way I read that is "we're doing this, and if you want something
> different feel free to fork it."   I don't want to fork it, so I guess
> I'm happy with what you have.  ;-)
> I understand the need you're trying to address (making it as easy as
> possible for non-tech patrons and encouraging affiliation with a
> particular library.  Maybe I'm unusual in being a patron at 4-5
> libraries?  (I'm aware of inter-library loans, but still am willing to
> drive a few extra miles to save that hassle.)
> Incidentally, sorry for missing the Librarian section of the FAQ.  I'm
> not one of those, but it does indeed answer several of my questions.
> :)
> > You should look at the homepage libraries have created for their
> > editions of LibX. Go to libx.org -> Editions and click on those pages.
> Yeah, again, the "edition" piece didn't fit with my assumptions, but
> it makes sense given your goal.
> > (There's isn't much difference
> > between your idea: download libx, scroll through a list of catalogs,
> > press ok; vs. ours: scroll through a list of catalogs, press ok,
> > download libx.)  The only difference is when someone frequently wants
> > to change their entire configuration - an infrequent case.
> Well, in any case we're talking about a small convenience over
> manually copy stuff into your-favorite-library's OPAC.  I think no one
> manually does the price comparisons that BookBurro enables in a click.
> I think supporting search over multiple libraries in a streamlined UI
> is useful, but as I said, I'm probably unusual.
> > This would not be the case if new configurations could be loaded into
> > an existing installation, because new configurations are not tested
> > with the code base a user may have installed.
> I understand.
> > > (This also means that two installed editions of LibX may not work well
> > > together, depending on what replacements you're making based on the
> > > edition configs.)
> ...
> > I didn't intend Firefox would be broken like this forever, I truly
> > expected them to adopt a modern extension model where each extension
> > would be given its own namespace for its javascript.
> Oh, has LibX been around long?  I had the impression that it was new.
> How long was VTBar before becoming LibX?
> I had the same feeling when I first saw this issue; an early release
> of GM had a bug in its XUL chrome definition and broken a significant
> hunk of Firefox in the process.  But actually, extensions -can- have
> their own namespace.  The main problem with firefox extension
> development is poor documentation and a lack of known best-practices.
> However, Google's Blogger Web Comments (developed while rubbing elbows
> with Firefox contributors) does this sandboxing.
> http://dl.google.com/firefox/google-webcomments.xpi
> (I don't claim to fully understand the code, but
> ./components/bootstrap.js and G_JSModule are the places to start.)
> > But this doesn't appear to be happening, so we've started giving a
> > libx prefix to new functions we added, e.g.
> > function libxGetProperty(prop, args) {
> > function libxInitializeCatalog(cattype, catprefix)
> > function libxInitializeCatalogs()
> > function libxInit()
> While you're at it, you might generate those with the edition label so
> that you can run two editions together.  ;-)
> libxInit becomes libx_mit_Init and libx_rit_Init.
> > I didn't know JavaScript supported nested namespaces, could you tell
> > me how do use them? Or do you mean I should attach my functions to
> > some Object I create?
> >
> > Is there an easy way to put multiple .js files in their own, nested
> namespace?
> BWC shows one way (subscripts), but the latter works, too.  See
> "Isolating your code through Namespaces" here:
> http://13thparallel.org/archive/coding-for-portability1/
> Cheers,
>   Jeremy
> _______________________________________________
> Libx mailing list
> Libx at mozdev.org
> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/libx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mozdev.org/pipermail/libx/attachments/20060428/46755c0b/attachment.htm

More information about the Libx mailing list