Re: [Proto-Scripty] Re: Element.update not working with div inside a table
Shows how outdated my HTML is. Thanks for the pointer. Its funny, when I was
googling around apparently once upon a time it was at least tolerated, if not
officially acceptable, to have div as a child of table.
___
Jeffrey Lee
http://www.jeffreyalanlee.com
jlee...@gmail.com
On Feb 15, 2011, at 23:20 , T.J. Crowder wrote:
Hi,
That HTML is invalid. You can't have a `div` as a child of `table`:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
If you want to subdivide a table like that, you probably want `thead`
(for your headers) and one or more `tbody` elements:
table
thead
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
/thead
tbody id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/tr
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/tbody
/table
...and then your update will have to be valid `tbody` content (e.g.,
rows).
Example:
http://jsbin.com/evuxe3
HTH,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com
On Feb 15, 10:59 pm, Jeff jlee...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a rails generated webpage. I've created a table definition as
follows:
table
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
div id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/div
/table
If I execute a $('transList').update('Test') or frankly any other text
or html, the existing table data remains, and the updated text is
placed above the entire table. However, if I do a view - source,
this new data doesn't show up in the page source at all, only the old
table data.
I'm having this problem in both Safari and Firefox. Any suggestions?
--
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.
--
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.
Re: [Proto-Scripty] Re: Element.update not working with div inside a table
Not in my memory of HTML, which begins in 1997. It's certainly
possible to put that into a browser and see something. Browsers are
designed to ignore or coerce invalid code as best they can, to
preserve the intent where possible. But there's a mile of difference
between the JavaScript DOM interpreter and the browser's HTML display
engine.
JavaScript doesn't even receive the HTML as written in code from the
browser when it's constructing its starting DOM tree, it uses the
output of the browser's first pass at munging the input code stream
into shape. This is why you can see a big difference between Firebug
and view source, for example.
So whenever you are interacting directly with the DOM, as you do in
Prototype Element#update or anything else that inserts elements into
the DOM, you are relied on to insert something that makes sense in the
context where it will be added. If you don't, you get an error or you
get ignored.
One other example of this, directly related to tables: It's perfectly
valid code to write table id=footrtdSomething/td/tr/
table, but it's more correct to write table
id=footbodytrtdSomething/td/tr/tbody/table. Most
browsers will silently add that missing intermediate element when the
page loads.
So if you wanted to get a handle on your first row, and you used $
('foo').childElements()[0] (totally made-up example) then you might
actually get a reference to the tbody -- the element you didn't
actually code!
Now you're probably smarter than that, and you'd write $
('foo').down('tr') and get what you wanted, but that's just an example
to make the point that the code you wrote isn't even guaranteed to be
the code you're going to be talking to when you start messing with the
DOM.
Walter
On Feb 16, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Jeffrey Lee wrote:
Shows how outdated my HTML is. Thanks for the pointer. Its funny,
when I was googling around apparently once upon a time it was at
least tolerated, if not officially acceptable, to have div as a
child of table.
___
Jeffrey Lee
http://www.jeffreyalanlee.com
jlee...@gmail.com
On Feb 15, 2011, at 23:20 , T.J. Crowder wrote:
Hi,
That HTML is invalid. You can't have a `div` as a child of `table`:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
If you want to subdivide a table like that, you probably want `thead`
(for your headers) and one or more `tbody` elements:
table
thead
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
/thead
tbody id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/tr
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/tbody
/table
...and then your update will have to be valid `tbody` content (e.g.,
rows).
Example:
http://jsbin.com/evuxe3
HTH,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com
On Feb 15, 10:59 pm, Jeff jlee...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a rails generated webpage. I've created a table
definition as
follows:
table
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
div id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/div
/table
If I execute a $('transList').update('Test') or frankly any other
text
or html, the existing table data remains, and the updated text is
placed above the entire table. However, if I do a view - source,
this new data doesn't show up in the page source at all, only the
old
table data.
I'm having this problem in both Safari and Firefox. Any
suggestions?
--
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
.
--
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
.
--
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: Element.update not working with div inside a table
Hi,
For some reason never learned about the tbody element. When did
that get added to the spec
Proposed in 1996, standardized in HTML 4.01 in 1999.[1] It's a cool
element, because amongst other things, you can have more than one of
them. So if you have a table with rows you want to replace and other
rows you don't, you can put them in separate TBODYs and group them
that way.
AFAIK, it's always been optional (officially optional) in the *markup*
(it certainly is in HTML5), but that's in the markup; in standards
mode, browsers have been inserting it in the DOM for you for years.
For example: http://jsbin.com/urito5 If you run that on IE6, IE7, IE8,
Chrome, Firefox, or Opera, they'll all say the only child element of
the TABLE element is a TBODY, although there's no TBODY in the markup.
Interestingly, HTML5 seems to allow TR to be a direct child of TABLE,
even in the DOM[2]. That surprises me, I thought it was just in the
list of elements that an engine was meant to infer.[3] I'm probably
just misreading the spec. I always explicitly include TBODY if there's
any chance I'm going to need to manipulate the DOM at the table level,
just so I know where I am even on edge browsers.
1: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html#edef-TBODY
2: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
3: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#optional-tags
Best,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com
On Feb 16, 4:37 pm, Jeffrey Lee jlee...@gmail.com wrote:
That will teach me to rely on google and random discussions online. :) I was
suspicious that the div was in an awkward location, but hadn't come up with
a good way to replace just the body of the table. For some reason never
learned about the tbody element. When did that get added to the spec, or has
that always been there and just not used by hacks like me? Granted the last
time I spent any energy on creating and editing web pages before this year
was in the late 90's.
___
Jeffrey Leehttp://www.jeffreyalanlee.com
jlee...@gmail.com
On Feb 16, 2011, at 8:28 , Walter Lee Davis wrote:
Not in my memory of HTML, which begins in 1997. It's certainly possible to
put that into a browser and see something. Browsers are designed to ignore
or coerce invalid code as best they can, to preserve the intent where
possible. But there's a mile of difference between the JavaScript DOM
interpreter and the browser's HTML display engine.
JavaScript doesn't even receive the HTML as written in code from the
browser when it's constructing its starting DOM tree, it uses the output of
the browser's first pass at munging the input code stream into shape. This
is why you can see a big difference between Firebug and view source, for
example.
So whenever you are interacting directly with the DOM, as you do in
Prototype Element#update or anything else that inserts elements into the
DOM, you are relied on to insert something that makes sense in the context
where it will be added. If you don't, you get an error or you get ignored.
One other example of this, directly related to tables: It's perfectly valid
code to write table id=footrtdSomething/td/tr/table, but it's
more correct to write table
id=footbodytrtdSomething/td/tr/tbody/table. Most browsers
will silently add that missing intermediate element when the page loads.
So if you wanted to get a handle on your first row, and you used
$('foo').childElements()[0] (totally made-up example) then you might
actually get a reference to the tbody -- the element you didn't actually
code!
Now you're probably smarter than that, and you'd write $('foo').down('tr')
and get what you wanted, but that's just an example to make the point that
the code you wrote isn't even guaranteed to be the code you're going to be
talking to when you start messing with the DOM.
Walter
On Feb 16, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Jeffrey Lee wrote:
Shows how outdated my HTML is. Thanks for the pointer. Its funny, when I
was googling around apparently once upon a time it was at least tolerated,
if not officially acceptable, to have div as a child of table.
___
Jeffrey Lee
http://www.jeffreyalanlee.com
jlee...@gmail.com
On Feb 15, 2011, at 23:20 , T.J. Crowder wrote:
Hi,
That HTML is invalid. You can't have a `div` as a child of `table`:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
If you want to subdivide a table like that, you probably want `thead`
(for your headers) and one or more `tbody` elements:
table
thead
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
/thead
tbody id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/tr
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/tbody
/table
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Element.update not working with div inside a table
Yay! i learned my HTML tip-of-the-day: multiple TBODY tags! Now, i'm
off to find an excuse to use it.
-joe t.
On Feb 16, 12:38 pm, T.J. Crowder t...@crowdersoftware.com wrote:
Hi,
For some reason never learned about the tbody element. When did
that get added to the spec
Proposed in 1996, standardized in HTML 4.01 in 1999.[1] It's a cool
element, because amongst other things, you can have more than one of
them. So if you have a table with rows you want to replace and other
rows you don't, you can put them in separate TBODYs and group them
that way.
AFAIK, it's always been optional (officially optional) in the *markup*
(it certainly is in HTML5), but that's in the markup; in standards
mode, browsers have been inserting it in the DOM for you for years.
For example:http://jsbin.com/urito5If you run that on IE6, IE7, IE8,
Chrome, Firefox, or Opera, they'll all say the only child element of
the TABLE element is a TBODY, although there's no TBODY in the markup.
Interestingly, HTML5 seems to allow TR to be a direct child of TABLE,
even in the DOM[2]. That surprises me, I thought it was just in the
list of elements that an engine was meant to infer.[3] I'm probably
just misreading the spec. I always explicitly include TBODY if there's
any chance I'm going to need to manipulate the DOM at the table level,
just so I know where I am even on edge browsers.
1:http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html#edef-TBODY
2:http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
3:http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#optional-tags
Best,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com
On Feb 16, 4:37 pm, Jeffrey Lee jlee...@gmail.com wrote:
That will teach me to rely on google and random discussions online. :) I
was suspicious that the div was in an awkward location, but hadn't come
up with a good way to replace just the body of the table. For some reason
never learned about the tbody element. When did that get added to the
spec, or has that always been there and just not used by hacks like me?
Granted the last time I spent any energy on creating and editing web pages
before this year was in the late 90's.
___
Jeffrey Leehttp://www.jeffreyalanlee.com
jlee...@gmail.com
On Feb 16, 2011, at 8:28 , Walter Lee Davis wrote:
Not in my memory of HTML, which begins in 1997. It's certainly possible
to put that into a browser and see something. Browsers are designed to
ignore or coerce invalid code as best they can, to preserve the intent
where possible. But there's a mile of difference between the JavaScript
DOM interpreter and the browser's HTML display engine.
JavaScript doesn't even receive the HTML as written in code from the
browser when it's constructing its starting DOM tree, it uses the output
of the browser's first pass at munging the input code stream into shape.
This is why you can see a big difference between Firebug and view source,
for example.
So whenever you are interacting directly with the DOM, as you do in
Prototype Element#update or anything else that inserts elements into the
DOM, you are relied on to insert something that makes sense in the
context where it will be added. If you don't, you get an error or you get
ignored.
One other example of this, directly related to tables: It's perfectly
valid code to write table id=footrtdSomething/td/tr/table,
but it's more correct to write table
id=footbodytrtdSomething/td/tr/tbody/table. Most
browsers will silently add that missing intermediate element when the
page loads.
So if you wanted to get a handle on your first row, and you used
$('foo').childElements()[0] (totally made-up example) then you might
actually get a reference to the tbody -- the element you didn't actually
code!
Now you're probably smarter than that, and you'd write
$('foo').down('tr') and get what you wanted, but that's just an example
to make the point that the code you wrote isn't even guaranteed to be the
code you're going to be talking to when you start messing with the DOM.
Walter
On Feb 16, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Jeffrey Lee wrote:
Shows how outdated my HTML is. Thanks for the pointer. Its funny, when
I was googling around apparently once upon a time it was at least
tolerated, if not officially acceptable, to have div as a child of
table.
___
Jeffrey Lee
http://www.jeffreyalanlee.com
jlee...@gmail.com
On Feb 15, 2011, at 23:20 , T.J. Crowder wrote:
Hi,
That HTML is invalid. You can't have a `div` as a child of `table`:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
If you want to subdivide a table like that, you probably want `thead`
(for your headers) and one or more `tbody` elements:
table
thead
tr
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Element.update not working with div inside a table
Hi,
That HTML is invalid. You can't have a `div` as a child of `table`:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular-data.html#the-table-element
If you want to subdivide a table like that, you probably want `thead`
(for your headers) and one or more `tbody` elements:
table
thead
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
/thead
tbody id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/tr
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/tbody
/table
...and then your update will have to be valid `tbody` content (e.g.,
rows).
Example:
http://jsbin.com/evuxe3
HTH,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Engineer
tj / crowder software / com
www / crowder software / com
On Feb 15, 10:59 pm, Jeff jlee...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a rails generated webpage. I've created a table definition as
follows:
table
tr
thItem/th
thTransaction Type/th
thQuantity/th
thAmount/th
thTransaction comments/th
/tr
div id = transList
tr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/trtr
bunch of table data
/tr
/div
/table
If I execute a $('transList').update('Test') or frankly any other text
or html, the existing table data remains, and the updated text is
placed above the entire table. However, if I do a view - source,
this new data doesn't show up in the page source at all, only the old
table data.
I'm having this problem in both Safari and Firefox. Any suggestions?
--
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.
