Christophe Porteneuve wrote: > Hmmmm if that frame is yours to play with at the DOM level, you can call > JS methods in there that will have the proper window reference, even if > you call them from another frame. You could also inject a synthetic > <script> element in there. It's not necessarily cleaner, though. > > Maybe you actually need to run JS in another frame's context, and maybe > not. If you're certain your need cannot be met in a less hackish way, > then so be it! Real-world apps are full of circuituous yet legitimate > needs, unfortunately.
I guess I would prefer more violent agreement here, but sticking one danged string into an IFRAME.src attribute is /extremely/ clean, so its only "hackish"ness is non-compliance with broken and un-followed standards. > Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD Why "TDD"? That wouldn't refer to <tremulously> Test-Driven Development </tremulously>, would it? > This specific case aside, be it on a public or private site, playing the > standards as much as possible is always a good idea on the long run. Another great thing about fuzzy standards is, if you invent a killer app using one, you get to help resolve and focus them. -- Phlip http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
