On Jun 12, 2007, at 3:49 AM, Erik Beeson wrote:
Obviously it would be trivial for me to just edit the plugin, but I
try to avoid that as much as possible (makes upgrading a
nightmare), and this seems like a legitimate issue. If you try one
of the jEditable demos and remove all of the
Hello friends,
i'm considering developing a small standalone app to access the jquery doc. Is
the documentation's raw content available somewhere online?
Thank you,
Alexandre
Alexandre Plennevaux - LAb[au] asbl.vzw / MediaRuimte
Lakensestraat/Rue de Laeken 104
B-1000
Mike Alsup wrote:
I'm *really* excited to be able to run Safari on Windows, but has anyone
used this beta? I've never seen anything render so slowly. It's
entirely unusable on my XP box.
It is also totally annoying that you can't run Safari 3 beta and 2 side
by side on a Mac... grrr,
On Jun 11, 7:36 pm, Glen Lipka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I was really annoyed to have to put that in.
The guy I helped produce the site insisted on switching.
I was going to put in the jQuery version of lightbox, but it has an issue
with FF for the Mac (which of course my friend uses).
Thanks Erik, it works great! :)
$('div.commentfooter span').filter(function() { return $(this).html() ==
'test'; }).append('class');
---dominik
On an (un)related note: Is anybody having rendering quirks with the
Safari 3 beta on Win XP? I just noticed that a couple sites of mine that
I thought would render well in Safari are messed up. Even Google Ads
seems to be affected.
Anybody with similar problems?
-- Felix
PS: Click on the
here is a link to my fadein problem:
http://www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
best regards
sk
sample code of this problem is here:
http://www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
Up on this issue :)
link to sample page with the problem: www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
the problem is visualized at http://www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
link to sample page:
http://www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
ROLLING STONES - A BIGGER BANG
Warszawa Służewiec 25 lipca 2007 r.
http://klik.wp.pl/?adr=http%3A%2F%2Fadv.reklama.wp.pl%2Fas%2Frollingstones.htmlsid=1186
sample page:
http://www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
link to sample:
http://www.torli.pl/fadein/index.html
lockman
Oh my..
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/2fb8eb9152b705ef
It's happening again today (2007-06-12 09:45Z). I got the message
jQuery JavaScript Library has a problem over at Documentation
(http://docs.jquery.com/). The main site (http://jquery.com/) isn't
affected
nothing works as expected on my box (xp+sp2), google is broken, and text
doesn't display on most of the pages (it only actually appeared on one
page - google.com).. and there's no text in the menus.. it seems like
they rushed this beta a bit..
dennis.
Felix Geisendörfer wrote:
On an
Hi Vivi,
Do you have a sample page so we can see this in action?
On 6/12/07, Vivi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Up on this issue :)
I saw it too, although problem vanished after 5 minutes ish.
On 6/12/07, Michael Andreas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh my..
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/2fb8eb9152b705ef
It's happening again today (2007-06-12 09:45Z). I got the message
jQuery JavaScript
I have a function which generates an AJAX request to retrieve information.
The display of this information requires modification of the interface - the
structure of the function is roughly:
function getInfo() {
do AJAX request, success callback is onAjaxResponse
setup interface to display
Great, thanks.
How do you know this - is it part of the ECMAScript specification or is
there some other reference you can point me too?
--rob
On 6/12/07, Mike Alsup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's guaranteed as long as you don't force a synchronous call using
the async option.
Mike
On
I can confirm I can't access the site either, however I am able to
ping the site:
PING www.jquery.com (66.199.227.42) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 66-199-227-42.reverse.ezzi.net (66.199.227.42):
icmp_seq=1 ttl=46 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 66-199-227-42.reverse.ezzi.net (66.199.227.42):
I see the problem. It's an issue with how the success handler is
called from the form plugin. When you specify a target element the
success callback is being invoked once for every matching element.
This is not correct and I will need to fix it. In the meantime, you
can mod your code like
Yeah, it's certainly open to interpretation. As currently implemented
it mimics the jQuery load method and so the behavior is the same for
something like this:
$('myTargets').load('myUrl', function() { alert('ok'); });
In the above you would get an alert for every matching target. But to
me
Thanks Mike!
Working really nice now.
jquery rocks :)
best reards,
sławek
Mike Alsup wrote:
I'm *really* excited to be able to run Safari on Windows, but has anyone
used this beta? I've never seen anything render so slowly. It's entirely
unusable on my XP box.
It seems that reports of success w/this in XP and Vista are all over the place.
Apple's bringing beta
-
SlickSpeed is a CSS selector test suite provided by the MooTools folk.
This tool comes at the same time as they release CSS3 support in Mootools, and
it compares Prototype, jQuery, MooTools, Ext, and CSS Query.
http://ajaxian.com/archives/slickspeed-css-selector-testsuite
-
- Bil
It's by the people who won the testing, so that makes it just a little
suspect. This is probably just like the testing from about 6 months back in
which the jQuery library was several versions older than the most recent.
That said, here's what I got:
IE 7.0.57/PC
-
prototype
Andy Matthews schrieb:
It's by the people who won the testing, so that makes it just a little
suspect. This is probably just like the testing from about 6 months back in
which the jQuery library was several versions older than the most recent.
That said, here's what I got:
IE 7.0.57/PC
It's crazy how much faster Prototype, MooTools and ext are.
-Original Message-
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Stuhr
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:14 AM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: SlickSpeed CSS Selector
One of the reasons that these libraries have made substantial
improvements has been that jQuery has lead the pack in terms of
innovation and our efforts have motivated them to finally improve their
frameworks. Prototype is probably the best example of this, having been
forced to finally
Michael Stuhr wrote:
my results:
FF 2.0.0.4 WinXP-SP2
http://onenterframe.de/temp/
micha
Is Jquery slower because it's more compact then? ie. better for light usage?
I much prefer the syntax and the community around jquery. I never got
any helpful responses from anyone on the mootools
Don't we have a plugin which might allay some of the speed concerns?
I'm LOVING the fact that jQuery is 19k, BUT even if it were to bump up to
25k or 30k, it would STILL be the smallest overall library. And honestly,
these days, people spend 100k just on one IMAGE, which doesn't even provide
any
Well here is my personal (and widely uneducated) opinion on this speed test.
First what I think is good about it:
* each framework get's it's own iframe - avoid conflicts between them
* the test itself is written without using a framework
What I think is bad about it:
* There are 3
Great post, Felix! Very well said.
What does this mean? It means that jQuery is
nowhere as slow as the final test results make it appear (26x slower then
mootools). It means that mootools got the performance lead in some specific
selector (and does good in general) which is given way too
Yeah, the server was having some difficulties, it should be back up in a minute.
--John
On 6/12/07, traunic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Same here, another DOS attack? But then the ping would fail right?
On Jun 12, 10:57 am, John Resig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, the server was having some difficulties, it should be back up in a
minute.
--John
On 6/12/07, traunic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Same here, another DOS attack? But then the ping would fail right?
FWIW, the visual jQuery
I agree. I don't want to see jQuery get bloated, but if it was
between the two options of Keep it 20kb but slower or Go to
25-30kb and get major improvements I'd vote for number two. I'd only
go for number one if there was really going to be little improvement
to any of the changes.
One of
Actually, I did manage to install Safari 3 and maintain Safari 2. To do
this, you have to copy Safari 2 into another folder in the applications
folder (I made one called Safari2). So Safari 2 exists in both the folder
and the Applications folder. Then I ran the installer, which replaced the
If you need documenation, this might help.
http://jquery.bassistance.de/api-browser/
FWIW, the visual jQuery site is down as well:
Rey Bango wrote:
Hi Robert,
Thats precisely the reason that its slower. We continue to work on
providing the most comprehensive functionality in the smallest
package. This is one of the drawbacks of that approach.
Rey...
Robert O'Rourke wrote:
Is Jquery slower because it's more compact
I don't know if order matters, but I kept all the elements in
alphabetical order when adding this. I inserted it between
IEFavoritesWereImported and InputFieldWidthRatio.
-Matt
On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:16 AM, Franck Marcia wrote:
Yes, I did. I applied Matt's tip, restarted Safari and the
Shelane Enos wrote:
Actually, I did manage to install Safari 3 and maintain Safari 2. To do
this, you have to copy Safari 2 into another folder in the applications
folder (I made one called Safari2). So Safari 2 exists in both the folder
and the Applications folder. Then I ran the installer,
Klaus Hartl schrieb:
Shelane Enos wrote:
Actually, I did manage to install Safari 3 and maintain Safari 2. To do
this, you have to copy Safari 2 into another folder in the applications
when i'm not totally wrong: safari 3 adds some basic libs to your OSX so
keeping them side by side is
Is the documentation's raw content available somewhere online?
Yes it is, on the API page: http://jquery.com/api/
You find a link to many versions of the api, like XML and JSON.
~Sean
Mike,
This didn't work for me. Did anyone get the debug menu working on Windows
yet?
It worked for me, but the file isn't created until the first time you run
Safari.
-Dan
I believe it is a vertical line that goes down the middle of the zoomed
image.
In a previous post, there were suggestions of how to fix this.
One day, I or someone will get around to fixing it. I believe it should
also be fixed to use the same HTML markup as the prototype one. This allows
for
Ahh, yes it's working normally now. Cheers.
-Michael-
On Jun 12, 6:02 pm, Rob Desbois [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I saw it too, although problem vanished after 5 minutes ish.
Hi there,
is it possible to bind a keydown event to intercept the enter/return key? I
have a form that is submitted manually and does not have form tags around it
(can't do this, restriction of the cms I am using). and now it - of course -
doesn't react with a start search when hitting return
This should do the trick:
$("yourSelector").keydown(function(e){
if (e.keyCode == 13) {
$("yourSelector").submit();
}
});
-Marshall
Arne-Kolja Bachstein wrote:
Hi there,
is it possible to bind a
keydown event to
intercept the enter/return key? I have a form that
Hi,
i'm volunteer but John didn't create yet my SVN access...
so i'm waiting...
On May 30, 9:27 pm, Rey Bango [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthieu Paineau said that he wanted to continue to support it and would
be committing changes to SVN. I'm not sure, though, how he's coming
along with that.
John just IM'd me and he said you should be all set.
Look forward to seeing some awesome work on ImageBox Matthieu.
Rey...
mpaineau wrote:
Hi,
i'm volunteer but John didn't create yet my SVN access...
so i'm waiting...
On May 30, 9:27 pm, Rey Bango [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthieu
I've got a weird IE6 issue. I'm creating a DOM fragment that gets appended
to the DOM using the append() method.
Before that DOM method gets append, I'm doing some additional manipulation
to change the value of some form fields.
If I output the contends of alert(oDom.html()); I can see that my
Using the Ext JS DateField which exposes a bug with 1.1.2 that
prevents navigation beyond a month. They suggest using a release
1.1.2 as the bug has been resolved.
Problem is the following code (simplified for this example) no longer
works:
function xmlFromStr(text){
if (typeof
I just find some weird problem with Google AdSense. It's specific to
IE6 (IE7 not tested), in FF 2 working fine.
Google AdSense slows down jQuery rules matching--i.e., it's wait for
all the ad images to get loaded. I suppose, ready fails here.
While googling, I came across similar discussion
This topic comes up every time a speed test emerges. To me, speed is
totally irrelevant in most circumstances that I use jQuery.
Speed of Development is most important. if I can finish my job faster then
the user will be happier. If they have to wait 1/10 of a second longer,
they will not be
It is an known issue. I have a solution for it but have not implemented
it yet. Solution would be to dynamically add a string such as Click to
edit to an empty element. String would be configurable. This way you
have something to click even if element was empty.
Any other ideas are
In looking at the DOM manipulation commands I'm not clear on the best
way to insert a div into an existing div. More specifically I need to
do something like this:
Start with an empty div
div id=form_container
/div
Insert a div...
div id=form_container
div id=row1.../div -- inserted
/div
And
Well said. That about sums it up for me.
_
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Glen Lipka
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:08 AM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: SlickSpeed CSS Selector TestSuite
This topic comes up every time a
Well said Glen. I would have to agree that these tests are for the most
part totally irrelevant with regards to most usage. Anyways, I would
still use jQuery even if it was 30k. That is still
very small compared to a the image file sizes that are used in highly
designed/styled web sites.
I
Glen Lipka wrote:
This topic comes up every time a speed test emerges. To me, speed is
totally irrelevant in most circumstances that I use jQuery.
Speed of Development is most important. if I can finish my job faster
then the user will be happier. If they have to wait 1/10 of a second
Andy Matthews wrote:
Well said. That about sums it up for me.
Yes, I agree as well. The problem is that probably still people will
draw the wrong conclusions from such tests. I have the feeling that
library makers just use these tests to get draw attention. Thus its even
more important to
I would guess that most (at least a large percentage) of their target
audience has broadband.
-Original Message-
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Robert O'Rourke
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:56 AM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery]
A lot is being made of how small jQ is. From the quick check I did, jQ
compressed is 5k smaller than Prototype, and MooTools with a quick selection of
the functions that seem to be in jQ was 27k, only 10k more than jQ. Considering
the library is typically downloaded once and then cached,
Rey Bango wrote on 6/12/2007 7:25 AM:
So at the end of the day, it comes down to this:
- We can increase selector speeds at the expense of file size
or
- We can continue to focus on providing tight code in a small package
and take what is arguably a small hit in speed
Since most browsers
On 6/12/07, Glen Lipka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This topic comes up every time a speed test emerges. To me, speed is
totally irrelevant in most circumstances that I use jQuery.
It does, and it is. That was why I tried to open the consideration out a bit
further to the eventuality of
To make the issue below more clear, I've posted an example of the issue:
http://www.pengoworks.com/workshop/jquery/ie6_form_fragment_bug.htm
If you run this code in FF or IE7, the checkbox will be checked. However, in
IE6 the checkbox is not checked--even though as you can see the DOM fragment
Also, if you move the each() line after it's append to the document, the
checkbox does get checked in IE6.
-Dan
-Original Message-
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dan G. Switzer, II
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:18 PM
To:
-Original Message-
From: Andy Matthews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would guess that most (at least a large percentage) of their target
audience has broadband.
Last weekend I was over a friends house with dial-up and I was amazed at
how completely unusable the web was for me...
Things I would vote to increase the base size with:
1. Dimensions http://jquery.com/plugins/project/dimensions (13k
uncompressed / 3 packed)
2. More selectors:
http://www.softwareunity.com/sandbox/JQueryMoreSelectors/ (12k
uncompressed / ? packed)
3. Speed Improvements (Up to 10k
Dan,
That is what I was getting ready to say myself, I replaced your function
with:
function (){
this.checked = true;
$(body).append(oDom.html());
}
and it returns the checked box, and looking at the textarea and seeing
that
That is what I was getting ready to say myself, I replaced your function
with:
function (){
this.checked = true;
$(body).append(oDom.html ());
}
and it returns the checked box, and looking at the textarea and seeing
that
This should work:
$('#form_containter').append('div id=row1');
then
$('#form_containter').append('div id=row2');
and so on...
Franck.
On 12 juin, 18:39, Brad Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In looking at the DOM manipulation commands I'm not clear on the best
way to insert a div into an
To make the issue below more clear, I've posted an example of the issue:
http://www.pengoworks.com/workshop/jquery/ie6_form_fragment_bug.htm
If you run this code in FF or IE7, the checkbox will be checked. However,
in
IE6 the checkbox is not checked--even though as you can see the DOM
fragment
Hi Marshall,
thank you _very_ much, it works like a charme!
Best regards
Arne
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marshall Salinger
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 6:05 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: Possible to intercept
Hi there,
I'm putting together an editable combobox using the twice modified
autocomplete plugin (Dylan Verhuel's I think). I start with a dropdown
and a text input, then create an array from the options values. I
replace the static HTML with a single text input followed by a link that
I
Diego A. wrote:
Keep in mind I don't using TinyMCE, I use FCKEditor, but the principle
should be the same...
Basically, I write a small plugin that is responsible for
1. Creating an instance of the editor
2. Retrieving the HTML content from the editor and 'preparing' it for
form submission
I was just wondering, should a val() call invoke a change event? If
not, is there a good way to emulate this behavior.
Thanks
Josh
digitalbush.com
Someone once said to me this will be a moot point by 2008 - but I
totally disagreed with them. Yes countries like the UK, USA, Canada
and Japan may have 80% coverage and 50% subscription rates, but in
these countries as you say there are still a large proportion of users
on dialup.
Many
On 12 juin, 21:21, Brad Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
var c = $(#font-container);
c.append('div class=subdiv');
c.children(div:last-child).html(pLorem ipsum .../p); // get
the last inserted div
You could use an id and increment it each time you insert a child and
then use this id
Josh,
I was just wondering, should a val() call invoke a change event? If
not, is there a good way to emulate this behavior.
You could overwrite the default behavior:
$.fn.extend({
val: function( val ) {
return val == undefined ?
( this.length ?
Try this...
$('div class=subdiv').appendTo(#font-container).html(pLorem
ipsum .../p)
Isn't chaining great?!
George
On Jun 12, 8:21 pm, Brad Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Franck!
I had something working but that is more compact.
Since I will need to place content into the
Fabien Meghazi wrote:
Maybe what I want to do is pointless or too complicated.
I'm curious to know how do you manage double client/server side
validation in your applications ?
No, its no pointless at all. Its a very important issue, something I'd
like to deal with on a more long term issue.
Robert O'Rourke wrote:
Hi there,
I'm putting together an editable combobox using the twice modified
autocomplete plugin (Dylan Verhuel's I think). I start with a dropdown
and a text input, then create an array from the options values. I
replace the static HTML with a single text input
Thank you. Any idea how I could attach to regular javascript call like
x.value='something' ?
On Jun 12, 2:44 pm, Dan G. Switzer, II [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Josh,
I was just wondering, should a val() call invoke a change event? If
not, is there a good way to emulate this behavior.
You
One more quick thing, is it possible to attach this to the val() of a
single input, or am I limited to extending this globally?
On Jun 12, 2:44 pm, Dan G. Switzer, II [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Josh,
I was just wondering, should a val() call invoke a change event? If
not, is there a good way
Ⓙⓐⓚⓔ wrote:
a new, and I think very useful function, match()
I find that last one quite interesting:
|$(#showScript).toggle(
function(){$(script:last).clone().textNodes().wrap(code/).parent().appendTo(body)}
,function(){$(code).remove()}
);
|
Could you explain a bit what is
I hear a lot of discussion about how jQuery isn't that slow, the test
wasn't perfectly fair (what test is?), that keeping code small is
important, and that development time is the most important thing.
1) Lots of people take speed tests seriously, even if they're not a
good way to judge a
Excellent! And yes, chaining is great.
I had tried chaining with append, but I now realize why that wasn't
working (it was putting HTML into font-container and not subdiv).
This combined with Franck's last example give me exactly what I need.
Brad
On Jun 12, 1:44 pm, George [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sean Catchpole wrote:
2) Making jQuery faster doesn't mean it has to be bigger in size, only
more clever.
Well, at some point there are boundaries and it has to become bigger.
For example if using native XPath support in certain browsers is the
only way to speed it up.
--Klaus
it totaly agree. And about the Dimensions plugin: a lot of other
plugins use their own (not so good) implementation of the
functionality the Dimensions plugin provide.
On 12 jun, 20:22, Glen Lipka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things I would vote to increase the base size with:
1. Dimensions
On 6/9/07, Jose Manuel Zea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I´m still trying to fix this.
...
So the thing is that when I set the attribute src of the image after
the page is loaded, in IE6 doesn´t work if the image is not in the
cache.
Please help!! I don´t know how to explain this to my client.
What I'd like to do is host my images remotely, but only if the remote
host is able to return my images in a short amount of time. Can
jQuery be used to start a timer when the page is first hit and if
certain images are not loaded in X amount of seconds, then use a
different url for the images?
Josh,
One more quick thing, is it possible to attach this to the val() of a
single input, or am I limited to extending this globally?
Instead of calling the below method val call it something else--like
valChange() or something. Then just call that new method any time you want
the change event
My goal was to detect a val() call from within my masked input plugin.
So, when someone says $(#id).maskedinput('(999) 999-') , I
would love to be able to detect when that value had been set
programatically and then re-check the masking.
So, if someone does a $(#id).val('555-867-5309')
Dan G. Switzer, II wrote:
Josh,
One more quick thing, is it possible to attach this to the val() of a
single input, or am I limited to extending this globally?
Instead of calling the below method val call it something else--like
valChange() or something. Then just call that new method any
Josh,
My goal was to detect a val() call from within my masked input plugin.
So, when someone says $(#id).maskedinput('(999) 999-') , I
would love to be able to detect when that value had been set
programatically and then re-check the masking.
The only way I know to do that, would be to
That's kind of what I was thinking. I was hoping that their might be
a better way.
On Jun 12, 3:43 pm, Dan G. Switzer, II [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Josh,
My goal was to detect a val() call from within my masked input plugin.
So, when someone says $(#id).maskedinput('(999) 999-') , I
That's kind of what I was thinking. I was hoping that their might be
a better way.
I'd advise against doing that by default. I suppose you could add it as
config option for those users that might not have any control over how the
field is being updated.
I would think that would be exception
Sean Catchpole wrote:
I hear a lot of discussion about how jQuery isn't that slow, the test
wasn't perfectly fair (what test is?), that keeping code small is
important, and that development time is the most important thing.
1) Lots of people take speed tests seriously, even if they're not a
Actually, there currently isn't a programmatic way to set the value
and have it be masked automagically for the developer. I just wanted
to see if I could hook into existing methods to keep from having to
add too much syntax. It's driven off of focus,blur,keypress and
pasting(on certain
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
