If you aren't familiar with either, and don't have an installed base of code for either, go with jQuery. For some of my stuff I started out using Prototype, and it does everything I'm looking for in a JavaScript library (along with Scriptaculous for some visual effects), so I never saw the need to make the switch. But if I were to start now, I'd go with jQuery as well.
Personally, I don't have a strong bias towards one or the other anymore. I'd play with both and see which fits your style of JavaScript programming, what the rest of the people on your team like, and so on.
As someone who's written a book on each technology, I feel uniquely qualified to comment. At this stage, Prototype is a dinosaur. It's tried valiantly to keep up, but its origin in trying to make JavaScript look like Ruby, and its intrusiveness into the page make it a distant second to jQuery, in my opinion.
While I haven't written a Dojo book, I did do a technical review of one. David is right, though Dojo is not a bad library, I'd still recommend jQuery as I prefer its approach. Dojo is a bit heavy for my tastes.
But ultimately, it depends upon your own needs and approach you prefer.
anyz mick
Greenhorn
Joined: Aug 09, 2004
Posts: 15
posted
0
Thanks for very helpfull replies. Time to learn new library in our project is very crusial and we are looking for easy to use library. So jQuery will be our obvious choice if its learning curve is less than that of DoJo. I'm also evaluating jMaki, a wraper on various Ajax based libraries. I think it will lot easy to work with wraper classes as compared with scripting everything (yes it loses certain control over widgets and less flexible.) jMaki at time is not providing wideges from jQuery but it is wraping many others. So if we find our required widget jMaki should be OK. I will take a detailed look into jMaki.