[Proto-Scripty] Re: Generating invalid HTML for purpose of custom attributes

2011-03-28 Thread RobG


On Mar 27, 11:43 am, Walter Lee Davis wa...@wdstudio.com wrote:
 On Mar 26, 2011, at 9:37 PM, kstubs wrote:
  Is it bad, or does it make parsing objects unstable if you append
  custom attributes to an HTML tag?  Lets say I want to keep track of
  a number, maybe a customers ID, so I do something like:

  var div = new Element('div', {'customerID':1234});

The issues are inadvertent overwriting of HTML attributes (so you
can't just use any attribute name, you have to be careful) and IE's
mishandling of DOM element attributes and properties.

To get consistency across browsers, you have to read the attributes
using getAttribute and set them (using code) with setAttribute.
Because IE munges attributes and properties, you should only ever use
DOM properties for HTML atributes.

So you need to be careful to distinguish between the two and only use
the appropriate method, which is why it is usually suggested to not
use custom attributes and to use a data object instead, that way you
only ever use one method that is consistent for all browsers.


  which should result in:
  div customerID=1234/div

Should being the operative word. Note that in IE, the div DOM
element will have a property of customerID, but it will not in
Firefox. That sort of inconsistency is why you should avoid custom
attributes and properties.

Perhaps that issue is fixed in IE 9, but it will be a very long time
before you can ignore all other versions of IE on the web.


 HTML5 lets you do this, and pretty much anything else you like, by  
 adding a data- prefix to the attribute name. Have at it.

HTML5 is not a standard, nor is it widely supported yet.


--
Rob

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.



[Proto-Scripty] Re: Generating invalid HTML for purpose of custom attributes

2011-03-28 Thread T.J. Crowder
 Because IE munges attributes and properties, you should only ever use
 DOM properties for HTML atributes.

This is (as I understand it) one part of the rationale for the `data-`
prefix: There aren't any DOM element properties with those names, and
so IE's broken behavior isn't an issue with them. Yes, it does dump
them on the element instance (if you put a data-foo attribute on a
div, the element instance for that div will indeed have a property
called data-foo on it -- prior to IE9), but it's harmless (though as
always, YMMV).

For instance, try this:
http://jsbin.com/ewade3/2

That works fine on IE6, IE7, (I don't have IE8 handy), IE9, Chrome 10,
Safari 5, Firefox 3.6, and Opera 11 under Windows; and Chrome 10,
Firefox 3.6, and Opera 11 under Linux (Ubuntu 10.04 LTS). I don't have
a Mac handy, but it works in Mobile Safari on my iPhone. :-) The IE
checks show that IE6 and IE7 and presumably IE8 (but not IE9, yay) do
dump the data- properties on the element, but you wouldn't look for
them there anyway since no one else does -- stick to `getAttribute`
(or better yet, Prototype's `readAttribute` because of the *other*
insane things IE does with attributes) and you're fine.

  HTML5 lets you do this, and pretty much anything else you like, by  
  adding a data- prefix to the attribute name. Have at it.

 HTML5 is not a standard, nor is it widely supported yet.

True. But there are two very different aspects to HTML5: Codifying and
standardizing the things browsers were already doing and had been
doing forever, and defining new things for them to do. By its very
nature, the first part is widely supported. :-) data- attributes
fall into that category (every browser I've ever seen supported custom
attributes on elements; HTML5 reins it in a bit). I dare say that that
subset of HTML5 is a better specification for HTML in the real world
than the HTML4.01 standard from over 11 years ago. Of course, the
trick with the HTML5 spec is knowing which bits are which. ;-)

-- T.J.

On Mar 28, 7:23 am, RobG rg...@iinet.net.au wrote:
 On Mar 27, 11:43 am, Walter Lee Davis wa...@wdstudio.com wrote:

  On Mar 26, 2011, at 9:37 PM, kstubs wrote:
   Is it bad, or does it make parsing objects unstable if you append
   custom attributes to an HTML tag?  Lets say I want to keep track of
   a number, maybe a customers ID, so I do something like:

   var div = new Element('div', {'customerID':1234});

 The issues are inadvertent overwriting of HTML attributes (so you
 can't just use any attribute name, you have to be careful) and IE's
 mishandling of DOM element attributes and properties.

 To get consistency across browsers, you have to read the attributes
 using getAttribute and set them (using code) with setAttribute.
 Because IE munges attributes and properties, you should only ever use
 DOM properties for HTML atributes.

 So you need to be careful to distinguish between the two and only use
 the appropriate method, which is why it is usually suggested to not
 use custom attributes and to use a data object instead, that way you
 only ever use one method that is consistent for all browsers.

   which should result in:
   div customerID=1234/div

 Should being the operative word. Note that in IE, the div DOM
 element will have a property of customerID, but it will not in
 Firefox. That sort of inconsistency is why you should avoid custom
 attributes and properties.

 Perhaps that issue is fixed in IE 9, but it will be a very long time
 before you can ignore all other versions of IE on the web.

  HTML5 lets you do this, and pretty much anything else you like, by  
  adding a data- prefix to the attribute name. Have at it.

 HTML5 is not a standard, nor is it widely supported yet.

 --
 Rob

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.



[Proto-Scripty] Re: support vars in the popwindow

2011-03-28 Thread tsunami
I am sorry, causing the mismatch with the direct answering. David, you
were right. But I cancelt the whole Problem, by adding another raw
with two radio buttons.
It is easier for me, saver and simpler.
But thanks for your efforts!

Best
tsunami

On 26 Mrz., 20:19, David Behler d.beh...@gmail.com wrote:
 I guess what he means is this:
 He opens a popup and wants to access a variable that's declared in the
 parent window.
 He could pass the value of the variable in the url (= by get, $_GET in
 PHP) but he wants to support large texts and might pose a problem when
 put in the url.

 Solution:
 I don't think there is a prototype-way to do this, but it can still be
 done with standard javascript:
 opener.document.getElementById(foo).value = 'bar';

 David

 Am 26.03.2011 19:03, schrieb T.J. Crowder:







  Hi,

  On Mar 26, 5:42 pm, tsunamio.ei...@googlemail.com  wrote:
  Dear all,
  is there a possibillity to support vars from the parent window? Yes,
  of course by get, but I want to support large texts.
  So get might be a wrong decision.

  Best
  tsunami
  Not following you, can you explain more what you mean?
  --
  T.J. Crowder
  Independent Software Engineer
  tj / crowder software / com
  www / crowder software / com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.



[Proto-Scripty] Re: future of script.aculo.us

2011-03-28 Thread T.J. Crowder
 What the future will be Prototype and script.aculo.us
 if my future developers want to choose only one library.
 Which should we choose for future ? and why ?

Predicting the future is a mug's game. Right now, jQuery is huge. It
has corporate sponsors, full-time staff, a massive userbase, and a lot
of momentum. Prototype doesn't have corporate sponsors or full-time
staff, I _think_ the userbase is rather smaller (but I don't have
numbers for that and there are a LOT of people using it with Rails),
and releases and new features aren't coming as quickly by comparison.
Both have passionate individuals extending, contributing to, and using
them.

But all that could change in, seemingly, seconds. The community could
take against a direction jQuery goes. A new library could appear that
takes over the world, pushing both Prototype and jQuery to the
sidelines. A megasponsor could decide that Prototype is the bee's
knees and hire people to work on it full-time.

If you review the replies in this thread, there's a clear theme: Teach
fundamentals, not libraries. JavaScript is a rich and very powerful
language that probably doesn't quite work the way your students think
it does. Make sure they understand it. Make sure they understand the
DOM -- not necessarily the details of the DOM API beyond a few basics,
but the fundamentals of elements and trees and nodes and documents.
Teach them how browsers work, and the nature and consequences (and
advantages) of asynchronous communication between client and server.
Teach them about JSON and basic XML. Teach them to seek, and read,
details from primary sources like the ECMAScript specification, the
various DOM specs, the CSS spec, the HTML5 spec, etc., rather than
relying on meta-sources like w3schools (*shudder*).

Do that, they'll have no trouble picking up any library they want to
with just a couple of hours' work reading the API docs, kicking around
the related tags on StackOverflow or the discussion group for the lib,
and tinkering.

Best,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com

On Mar 24, 11:09 am, Ali.MD alimihando...@gmail.com wrote:
 thank you very much
 my question about future
 jQuery and prototype and some other javascript library is similar to
 each other
 I can not find a significant difference between them. is that right ?
 a agree jquery is better to teach. and we must to teach other
 javascript library with jQuery
 I'm worried about the future
 What the future will be Prototype and script.aculo.us
 if my future developers want to choose only one library.
 Which should we choose for future ? and why ?
 i dont worry about plugins and extensions because we can use all of
 them together  ;)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.



[Proto-Scripty] Re: Generating invalid HTML for purpose of custom attributes

2011-03-28 Thread Moo
Hi,

I created a little helper for custom data-attributes:
http://mstuhlmann.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/working-with-custom-data-attributes/

Greets,
mstuhlmann

On 28 Mrz., 12:18, T.J. Crowder t...@crowdersoftware.com wrote:
  Because IE munges attributes and properties, you should only ever use
  DOM properties for HTML atributes.

 This is (as I understand it) one part of the rationale for the `data-`
 prefix: There aren't any DOM element properties with those names, and
 so IE's broken behavior isn't an issue with them. Yes, it does dump
 them on the element instance (if you put a data-foo attribute on a
 div, the element instance for that div will indeed have a property
 called data-foo on it -- prior to IE9), but it's harmless (though as
 always, YMMV).

 For instance, try this:http://jsbin.com/ewade3/2

 That works fine on IE6, IE7, (I don't have IE8 handy), IE9, Chrome 10,
 Safari 5, Firefox 3.6, and Opera 11 under Windows; and Chrome 10,
 Firefox 3.6, and Opera 11 under Linux (Ubuntu 10.04 LTS). I don't have
 a Mac handy, but it works in Mobile Safari on my iPhone. :-) The IE
 checks show that IE6 and IE7 and presumably IE8 (but not IE9, yay) do
 dump the data- properties on the element, but you wouldn't look for
 them there anyway since no one else does -- stick to `getAttribute`
 (or better yet, Prototype's `readAttribute` because of the *other*
 insane things IE does with attributes) and you're fine.

   HTML5 lets you do this, and pretty much anything else you like, by  
   adding a data- prefix to the attribute name. Have at it.

  HTML5 is not a standard, nor is it widely supported yet.

 True. But there are two very different aspects to HTML5: Codifying and
 standardizing the things browsers were already doing and had been
 doing forever, and defining new things for them to do. By its very
 nature, the first part is widely supported. :-) data- attributes
 fall into that category (every browser I've ever seen supported custom
 attributes on elements; HTML5 reins it in a bit). I dare say that that
 subset of HTML5 is a better specification for HTML in the real world
 than the HTML4.01 standard from over 11 years ago. Of course, the
 trick with the HTML5 spec is knowing which bits are which. ;-)

 -- T.J.

 On Mar 28, 7:23 am, RobG rg...@iinet.net.au wrote:

  On Mar 27, 11:43 am, Walter Lee Davis wa...@wdstudio.com wrote:

   On Mar 26, 2011, at 9:37 PM, kstubs wrote:
Is it bad, or does it make parsing objects unstable if you append
custom attributes to an HTML tag?  Lets say I want to keep track of
a number, maybe a customers ID, so I do something like:

var div = new Element('div', {'customerID':1234});

  The issues are inadvertent overwriting of HTML attributes (so you
  can't just use any attribute name, you have to be careful) and IE's
  mishandling of DOM element attributes and properties.

  To get consistency across browsers, you have to read the attributes
  using getAttribute and set them (using code) with setAttribute.
  Because IE munges attributes and properties, you should only ever use
  DOM properties for HTML atributes.

  So you need to be careful to distinguish between the two and only use
  the appropriate method, which is why it is usually suggested to not
  use custom attributes and to use a data object instead, that way you
  only ever use one method that is consistent for all browsers.

which should result in:
div customerID=1234/div

  Should being the operative word. Note that in IE, the div DOM
  element will have a property of customerID, but it will not in
  Firefox. That sort of inconsistency is why you should avoid custom
  attributes and properties.

  Perhaps that issue is fixed in IE 9, but it will be a very long time
  before you can ignore all other versions of IE on the web.

   HTML5 lets you do this, and pretty much anything else you like, by  
   adding a data- prefix to the attribute name. Have at it.

  HTML5 is not a standard, nor is it widely supported yet.

  --
  Rob

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.



[Proto-Scripty] wired object behavour in IE7

2011-03-28 Thread Björn Bartels
hi there,

i know this is generic JS und it is only occuring in IE7, but i hope you can
help me though...

i have an array/list of objects like

[
{
name : 'blah blah',
mp3 : 'http://server.tld/song.mp3',

},
.
]

when i do a for-in loop over such an object, i get its keys and values as it
should be...

but, the next line, when i try to access the objects' properties 'directly'
like

oTrack.mp3or oTrack['mp3']

all IE(7) outputs is a unsatisfying 'undefined'... (please, see the code
below for further details)


any ideas anyone, please?

YT
BB

code

for ( iTrack in aPlaylist ) {

var oTrack = aPlaylist[iTrack];

for ( mData in oTrack ) {

 document.write('' + iTrack + ', ' + mData + ', ' + oTrack[mData] + 'br /');
// everything seems fine, all keys, all values

}

document.write('' + iTrack + ', ' + oTrack.mp3 + 'br /');// nothing is
fine, outputs 'undefined' for any property
document.write('' + iTrack + ', ' + oTrack['mp3'] + 'br /'); // ...

}
/code

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.



[Proto-Scripty] Re: wired object behavour in IE7

2011-03-28 Thread T.J. Crowder
Hi,

Can you put together a minimalist, self-contained example that
demonstrates the problem and post it to jsbin.com or jsfiddle.net or
something? (You can't use document.write there, but you can append
paragraphs to the page or some such.)

BTW, your code to loop through the `aPlaylist` array isn't quite right
(but I don't think that's the actual problem). If you use `for..in` to
loop through the array's elements, you have to do some checks because
arrays can have properties other than array indexes, which will break
your code. Details here:
http://blog.niftysnippets.org/2010/11/myths-and-realities-of-forin.html

Fundamentally, I don't see a problem other than the above with what
you've quoted. Seems to work:
http://jsbin.com/ulesa4

HTH,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com

On Mar 28, 3:21 pm, Björn Bartels bbd...@googlemail.com wrote:
 hi there,

 i know this is generic JS und it is only occuring in IE7, but i hope you can
 help me though...

 i have an array/list of objects like

 [
     {
         name : 'blah blah',
         mp3 : 'http://server.tld/song.mp3',
         
     },
     .
 ]

 when i do a for-in loop over such an object, i get its keys and values as it
 should be...

 but, the next line, when i try to access the objects' properties 'directly'
 like

     oTrack.mp3    or     oTrack['mp3']

 all IE(7) outputs is a unsatisfying 'undefined'... (please, see the code
 below for further details)

 any ideas anyone, please?

 YT
 BB

 code

 for ( iTrack in aPlaylist ) {

 var oTrack = aPlaylist[iTrack];

 for ( mData in oTrack ) {

  document.write('' + iTrack + ', ' + mData + ', ' + oTrack[mData] + 'br /');
 // everything seems fine, all keys, all values

 }

 document.write('' + iTrack + ', ' + oTrack.mp3 + 'br /');    // nothing is
 fine, outputs 'undefined' for any property
 document.write('' + iTrack + ', ' + oTrack['mp3'] + 'br /'); // ...

 }

 /code

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Prototype  script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.