Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I’m curious as to the reasoning behind the standard procedure of prefixing jQuery plugin filenames with “jquery.”. Several tutorials state something like:
The use of the “jquery.” prefix eliminates any possible name collisions with files intended for use with other libraries.
I believe I have even seen a couple of plugins that actually require themselves not be renamed.
Are there any more specific reasons for this prefix, or is it simple the convention?
It’s just a convention, for example:
If you just had this and were using both, well, you see where confusion sets in:
Also, you might be using just vanilla JavaScript function files, and not want those to have a prefix, e.g.
editor.js, denoting it has no reliance on jQuery at all…it’s all around organization and maintainability.