[webXL]

I think this would only be worthwhile if you could do this:

  <script src="http://jquery.js"></script>

[kevincennis]

The WHATWG should just introduce a new <jquery> element that automatically pulls the latest version.

[docgnome]

Not unless jquery is going to be absorbed into ECMAscript it shouldn't.

[kevincennis]

<joke/>

[docgnome]

Ah. My bad.

[TazeTSchnitzel]

You could quite easily make the index page the latest jquery minified version, so yes.

[derrida]

I have a revolutionary idea: <script src="http://somedomainyoumanage/jquery.js></script>; + git and save the 100K

[Raphael]

<script src="/jquery.js></script>

[therandomguy]

... because

http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.7.2/jquery.min...

is not cool enough

[user-id]

I'd much prefer this, much the same way http://to/ used to operate:

    <script src="//cdn/jquery"></script>

[ozten]

Very cool. You could also do:

    <script src="http://jquery.js/latest"></script>

And keep / as an informative website.

[slig]

I can't tell if your you're joking or not. Linking to the latest version is a very nice way to break your app automatically.

[Zr40]

You can even drop the http: part, like this:

    <script src="//jquery.js/latest"></script>

[izak30]

Or use Content-Type negotiation. (please note, I do understand that this proposal is basically DOA)

[webXL]

Nah, too much typing. Maybe if you got rid of jquery.com. It's not even a company!

[debacle]

What would the source at js.js/js.js be?

[zachrose]

JS.js(js)

[nerdfiles]

js.js/js.js?js=js.js

Just because...