Please upgrade to 1.5.1 final and let us know if you still have
issues.
Thanks.
Tobie
On Jun 15, 5:46 pm, Sebastian Sastre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> after making work some code for Safari, Firefox and Opera it was
> time to invite "party pooper" IE to the party.
>
> After a while understanding myself and the Microsoft IE script
> debugger this bug IE "reports" was found. All was hasAttribute
> related.
>
> With a little use of the console I was able to see that the element
> that the code was "talking" to was already extended as expected but IE
> still complains.
>
> Found that in IE 6 (I didn't test this other versions yet)
> hasAttribute returns correctly true when the given attribute is found
> in the element but it returns null in case it don't which is
> inconsistent. I don't know if this is a bug or a feature but given
> that all other browsers returns false as expected for that case I
> propose replace this:
>
> "...
> Element.Methods.Simulated = {
> hasAttribute: function(element, attribute) {
> var t = Element._attributeTranslations, node;
> attribute = t.names[attribute] || attribute;
> node = $(element).getAttributeNode(attribute);
> return node && node.specified;
> }};
>
> ..."
>
> with this:
> "...
> Element.Methods.Simulated = {
> hasAttribute: function(element, attribute) {
> var t = Element._attributeTranslations, node;
> attribute = t.names[attribute] || attribute;
> node = $(element).getAttributeNode(attribute);
> if(!node){return false}
> else{return node && node.specified};
> }};
>
> ..."
>
> because with that it seems to behave.
>
> The other issue I've found is related to the extension of elements
> with empty id. I found that IE considers obscene to extend a div which
> has no id (collected using getElementsByTagName('div')). Other
> browsers seems to behave. Is desirable that one can give an
> homogeneous treatment to this creatures (elements I mean) so I will
> workarround it by now but I think something has to be done to properly
> extend elements without id even in IE (for consistence).
>
> I figured out this all is with Prototype 1.5.1_rc1 so maybe it's fixed
> I don't know yet
>
> cheers,
>
> Sebastian
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
