A more sugary way to create Y.Base derived objects.

gistfile1.js

/* What do we really care about when creating a Base-derived object?
   1. the object we are deriving from
   2. string name
   3. properties and methods 
   4. attributes 
   Goals: simpler method with fewer args & less nesting. Simplify 
   adding attributes. No need for empty [] hack as with Y.Base.create() */
Y.Example = Y.Model.derive('example-model', {
    // prototype methods and properties here
    hello: function () { 
        return 'hi'; 
    }
}, {
    // attributes here
    frobozz: {
        value: 'zorkmid',
        readOnly: true
    },
    grue: 17  // MOAR sugar; equivalent to grue: { value: 17 }
}, {
    // publish events here
    'somethingSpecial': {
        emitFacade: true,
        broadcast: 2,
    }
});
/* NOTES:
   1. Y.Base.derive() extends from Y.Base. Y.Model.derive() extends from 
      Y.Model. And so on. Eliminate an unnecessary arg.
   2. Assumption: mixins are less important and developers can always do this
      themselves. Perhaps allow a fourth optional [] argument to make it easier.
   3. Assumption: adding statics like HTML_PARSER is easy. Developers can do 
      this themselves. Better to focus on making attributes less clumsy to add. */

Well, I think I do like the chained methods approach as sugar for adding attributes and events. And for mixing in extensions. That approach seems cleaner to me than a single method that takes a whole bunch of arguments in a particular order.

Adding prototype methods through a special method seems weird to me, now that I'm looking at it.

I completely agree. I didn't like the proto as a method.