well, that's debatable, i think he may have gotten it right good to see somebody else taking to frameworks for a simple opacity change--i wonder how many plugins he's downloaded already
Hmm infact I try to learn and do everything myself rather than relying other code, i've set out to learn jQuery as oppose to just copying and pasting. As far as it's been communicated to me jQuery can provide me with more flexibility and better animations with a ridiciously small amount of code. If there is a 17kb file out there with this functionality you expect me not to use it?
Actually no, it's not. jQuery actually is JS. If you want to debate this, turn off JS in your browser and see if jQuery still works.
a matter of preference, nothing else. yes, you can do most things in jquery but it differs in how it does things. for example, my framework of choice, mootools, takes the approach of extending natural methods / prototyping elements and data types, which feels natural. jquery seems like smoke and mirrors, functions hiding behind the $ namespace. for instance, $("foo") returns an object via a selector in mootools. $("#foo") is a selector in jquery. you can do: //mootools var foo = $("foo"); foo.getPrevious().fade(0,1); // etc etc, extended element returned // jquery var foo = $("#foo"); foo.click(.... // fails, because foo is not extended. you need to $(foo).click. PHP: the same prototyping / extending applies to any method on any datatype like String, Number, Element, Object(!), Array etc etc. like i said, you can arrive to the same results - just different paths. i don't dispute that jquery is great at what it does -- just don't like how it does it. it may be sexy but its just the erotica of javascript, i like hardcore