On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:42 AM, bill walton <[email protected]> wrote:
> I probably should have said JS libraries, specifically the Prototype / > Scriptaculous libraries, which is what I was thinking of. I think it's > accurate to say that in those libraries, identification via id / name > predominates. Sure, but... > As I refactor back to classes, every modification / > elimination of id in the html requires examination / testing of the JS > to make sure I haven't eliminated a needed reference. The same isn't > required when making changes to classes. ..that's not true if you use getElementsByClassName to gather up collections of elements to operate on -- or maybe I'm the only one :-) > Absolutely agree. The OP asked about guidelines. Just trying to > communicate what I've found helpful. Sorry if I struck a nerve. Nerves? What nerves? All my nerves are currently committed to dealing with the JRuby on OC4J installation I'm inheriting :-) No, just wanted to make the point that class names in HTML can be equally useful for identifying JS objects -- obviously a YMMV area! H* -- Hassan Schroeder ------------------------ [email protected] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
