Ajax.Responders test failing is a know issue due to behavior of the ActiveX
XHR object.
All these (testing) issues will be addressed when Ajax is finally tested
against a proper Webrick backend. That means no more testing Ajax without
Ruby or over local file: scheme, but hey -- you couldn't even
Dude, please post a simple example, that's kinda confusing. It sound
like you need to be using bind or a closure somewhere though.
Colin
Matthew Williams wrote:
I have a series of Ajax.updaters in my application. A user selects an
item which triggers the ajax call and populates a DIV with
Colin Mollenhour wrote:
Is the sanitize step necessary? What would the performance hit be like
on a large response, and is the added complexity worth the trouble
considering all responses come from a controlled environment? You don't
sanitize HTML or XML responses, I say just use eval
The new web site is a huge improvement! But in the spirit of not
standing still, here are a couple feature requests...
1) Search!!
2) search in url: Like the way php.net web site works. So if wanted
information on a function I could just go http://www.prototypejs.org/
descendantOf
Colin, Michael, sanitizeJSON is an option and is off by default.
If is data created by a user, you better sanitize it.
The performance hit isn't that bad really.
Tobie
On Jan 25, 11:02 am, Colin Mollenhour [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Is the sanitize step necessary? What would the performance
I have a page that has two div elements. Inside a div is an image that
onhover opens as menu from which user can pick options. Once user pick
option an ajax call via Anthem library is executed and another image
within a div gets updated with generated chart. Now, anthem allows two
functions to be
On 1/25/07, tobie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Colin, Michael, sanitizeJSON is an option and is off by default.
Regarding your patch: Shouldn't the X-JSON processing also use evalJSON() ?
And WRT to options.sanitizeJSON, how about a AJAX.sanitizeJSON global
option for the default behaviour? Then
On 1/25/07, Martin Bialasinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regarding your patch: Shouldn't the X-JSON processing also use evalJSON() ?
Oops. It does, of cause.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Ruby
on
Hi all,
starting from the drag'n'shop demo, I started to write an AJAX Scrabble
(TM) as my first script.aculo.us app. I have the 225 fields in a table
and then make them droppable using
var fields = document.getElementsByClassName('field');
for (var i = 0; i fields.length; i++) {
Hi, thanks for the feedback.
I'm working on a better handling of exceptions. Will post a patch asap.
Regarding x-json, I think we should leave it as it is for consitency
and backwards compatibility. It should also still be available if the
mime-type is set to application/json.
I had thaught
Martin, I disagree with your handling of parameters. As previously
stated, I believe the X-JSON header handling should be left intact,
as-is, both for backwards compatibility, and because it is still useful
as a separate feature. The Content-type header detected as
application/json should be
On 1/25/07, tobie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had thaught about a global AJAX.sanitizeJSON option. It certainly
something we could implement at some point, but there are some
potential issues with that (especially if you rely on some third party
libs also using Prototype).
That would be only
I must admit Prototype is a wonderful collection of javascript
know-how. But 70kb is a little too heavy for my website. And, at the
same time I may be using only 20% of its functions in all of my pages.
So a question naturally arises: why not have a script where I could
specify which functions
Hi Rusty
there is a lightweight prototype included in moo.fx or moo-tools and
you can find a link to a compress version of 1.5.0 final in the blog
comments.
The compressed version is around 29kb iirc.
On 1/25/07, Rusty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I must admit Prototype is a wonderful
gzipped, prototype 1.5 (with all functionality, and easy debugging)
is 15k.
best,
thomas
Am 25.01.2007 um 23:43 schrieb Kjell Bublitz:
Hi Rusty
there is a lightweight prototype included in moo.fx or moo-tools and
you can find a link to a compress version of 1.5.0 final in the blog
I had thaught about a global AJAX.sanitizeJSON option. It certainly
something we could implement at some point, but there are some
potential issues with that (especially if you rely on some third party
libs also using Prototype).That would be only a problem, if the third party
module
It cannot hurt to be a bit more defensive with a one-time change. If
you grep for element._, you will find some more expando properties
used.
I know...
How about element._prototypejs_extended, element._prototypejs_overflow etc.
Actually, I agree.
Do you feel like posting a patch?
Best,
Most probably loads.
Why would you want to do that?
On Jan 24, 1:28 pm, snod0g [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are there any compatible issues that exist when trying to use both
prototype and dojo at the same time?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
Hello,
I have been doing some research and have yet to come across what I am
looking for, so I hope someone can shove me in the right direction.
Are there any catalog/ecommerce programs that make a better use of the
newer technologies like script.aculo.us to better integrate the
internal site
Snodog/Joe,
You can use prototype and dojo together, yes. I do it often --- like the
client-side form validation widgets with Dojo, the build tools, along with
some other widgets like the Fisheye Lens, calendar, etc. It's a very robust
library as well. Both together are pretty potent and give
20 matches
Mail list logo
