Re: Why is it "JSQuery"?

On Jun 6, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:

>> * [JAQL](https://code.google.com/p/jaql/): Too different from SQL
>> * [JSONPath](http://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/): Too verbose
>
> I don't agree with the too verbose, but lacking AND|OR is pretty crippling.

I had enough people complain about Test::XPath, which tests the structure of XML and HTML documents using XPath. They didn't like how verbose XPath was, preferring CSS selectors. So I ended up with a patch to support CSS syntax, too. CSS-style syntax is part of what people like about JQuery, too.

> Well, I'd also say that we don't care about syntaxes which are not
> already popular. There's no point in being compatible with something
> nobody uses. How many of the above have any uptake?

I think there is JQuery, JSONPath, and everything else, really. If we can draw some parallels, I think that would be sufficient to make people comfortable.

>> I do think that the name should be changed if we don’t follow an existing standard, as [JSQuery](https://code.google.com/p/gwtquery/wiki/JsQuery) is already a thing.
>
> I saw that too, but I don't get the impression that Google jsquery is
> all that active. No?

It’s Google. You really want to wrangle with their attorneys?

David