On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Diego A. wrote: > > Is the new link by any chance being inserted within the trigger > itself? (doesn't seem like it would work because the code takes the > href attribute from the trigger itself, not the link within it, but it > could cause something weird to happen).
Diego, you're pretty much on target here. I posted a follow-up at: http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/2cb9e3ed3ffc5622# that explains what the problem was. What I wound up using was event bubbling so I could replace something inside the span without affecting the binding between the handler and the element. > Other than that, are use using event delegation or live query or some > other way of binding events that is automatically executing the > ajaxBind function on the new link when it is inserted? > > On Apr 22, 9:51 pm, "s.ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm having a strange problem using $.ajax. Better to illustrate with >> the code: >> >> function ajaxBind(trigger) { >> trigger.click(function(){ >> $.ajax({ >> type: "POST", >> url: $(this).attr('href'), >> data: { >> 'authenticity_token': $ >> ('input[name=authenticity_token]').val() >> }, >> dataType: 'json', >> beforeSend: function(xhr) { >> xhr.setRequestHeader("Accept", "application/json"); >> }, >> // json contains id and partial keys >> success: function(json) { >> $('#task' + json['task']).html(json['partial']); >> } >> }); >> return false; >> }); >> >> } >> >> When the DOM element "trigger" is clicked, a request to the server is >> issued and the JSON response comes back. Hokey, dokey. The response >> is >> an html link. Something along the lines of: >> >> partial: "link in html that google would strip out anyway" >> >> This gets inserted using the html() function, as you see in the >> success: part of the $.ajax call, and all is well until I click on >> the >> new link. Then the link is interpreted as a request to open a >> document >> of type application/json. Firebug doesn't reveal anything unusual >> about the inserted HTML. Does anyone see the problem here? >> >> Thanks
