John, it result that it was my fault then... Here are the relevant commit infos:
http://dev.jquery.com/changeset/5941/trunk/jquery/src/event.js this was the ticket: http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/2614 I don't know/remember what made me suggest the use of "window.frameElement", but "window == window.top" works. Diego On 27 Gen, 23:06, Diego Perini <diego.per...@gmail.com> wrote: > John, > I could finally replicate the problem with the help of john dalton on > IE7 (I only had IE6 to test). > > The problem is the use of window.frameElement, shouldn't error since > the property is in our global space but who knows... > > Revert back the change to what is used in the original > ContentLoaded.js here: > > http://javascript.nwbox.com/ContentLoaded/contentloaded.js > > window == top > > or better as john dalton suggest: > > window == window.top > > it seems that testing in this way the "Access denied" error is > circumvented, I probably never fall in this case since I wasn't using > jQuery window.frameElement in my own code. > > Diego > > On 27 Gen, 21:34, Diego Perini <diego.per...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > John, > > > On 27 Gen, 20:23, John Resig <jere...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I think you misunderstood me. Simply accessing the frameElement > > > property from a frame that isn't on the same domain as the parent > > > frame causes an exception to be thrown. > > > I probably did. However I don't see any cross-frame access in that > > part of the code we are just peeking a property on the same window > > where jQuery is loaded, we always own that window.frameElement > > property. Am I missing something ? > > > > Previously the check was: !window.frameElement > > > Well the other way to do it is: > > > window.frameElement === null > > > which we already talked about when writing that patch, hope you recall > > that. > > > > Which was not enough - it completely breaks use of jQuery. There needs > > > It seemed to work well in 1.2.6 from what the OP says, I am sure there > > are other edge cases but even trying what is pointed out in ticket > > #3898 I cannot reproduce this bug. > > > It will help having a link to an example showing the misbehavior of > > ready(). > > > > to be a new check. Granted, the typeof one appears to be too extreme > > > but the previous one was broken, as well (and in a much worse way). > > > Could you further elaborate on the exact problems you detected with > > the iframe check ? > > > Diego > > > > --John > > > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Diego Perini <diego.per...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > John, > > > > well the reasons are ok, but the method is wrong in fact the doScroll > > > > () trick is actually short-circuited and will never be usable neither > > > > in iframes nor on the main document. So in IE everything will be > > > > started by the "onreadystatechange" event...a bit too late. > > > > > Diego > > > > > On 27 Gen, 20:09, John Resig <jere...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> That check, alone, is not sufficient, though. We were hitting a number > > > >> of ugly exceptions with IE - when dealing with cross-domain frames. > > > > >>http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/3880 > > > > >> In this commit:http://dev.jquery.com/changeset/6120 > > > > >> So some alternative solution will need to be derived - especially > > > >> since getting the exceptions was far worse (the page didn't load, at > > > >> all). > > > > >> --John > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Diego Perini > > > >> <diego.per...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > John, > > > >> > the report is OK and says the truth...Mexicans would say "ay ay > > > >> > ay !!!". > > > > >> > This is something that should have been avoided...a too critical > > > >> > place > > > >> > to play with. > > > > >> > The problem I see is that my patch and test for iframes got changed: > > > > >> > Line 2952 is currently: > > > > >> > if ( document.documentElement.doScroll && typeof window.frameElement > > > >> > === "undefined" ) (function(){ > > > > >> > This will always exclude the doScroll() magic. > > > > >> > When does the type of that property assumes an "undefined" type ? I > > > >> > would bet for "never" ? > > > > >> > That property can be "null" which is an "object" not an "undefined" > > > >> > value. Please fix that a.s.a.p. to avoid further problems and wrong > > > >> > reports. > > > > >> > I would take my part of responsibility for not having checked that, > > > >> > but releases are so fast I didn't even know a 1.3.1 was already > > > >> > available. > > > > >> > Diego > > > > >> > On 27 Gen, 17:24, John Resig <jere...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> >> Do you have a demo page that we can look at? > > > > >> >> --John > > > > >> >> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:01 AM, helianthus > > > > >> >> <project.heliant...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> >> > 1.2.6: > > > >> >> > No problems on all browsers tested. > > > >> >> > 1.3.1: > > > >> >> > IE7 & IE8 beta2: Fires only after all images are completely > > > >> >> > loaded. > > > >> >> > FF3, Opera 9, Chrome: Fires right after DOM is loaded. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
