It seems like a bug, as 1.3.1 is behaving differently from 1.2.6.
I posted errant's example to jquery-dev, let's see what they have to
say.
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev/t/f18e4a06e11fdb87
On Jan 27, 4:01 pm, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think it's a bug. I think it's just another example of IE's
> lack of standard compliance.
>
> On Jan 27, 12:53 pm, errant <d.cheka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > jQuery provides many ways to achieve similar results, sometimes
> > decision which way to use is up to developer. Personally, in first
> > example i like to have reference to span element with attached event
> > handlers without extra code. Maybe i'll use it in some other way later
> > in code. Anyway, append() gives different results in different
> > browsers, and it doesn't seems right, right? So far there were no
> > response from dev. team, maybe i should post bugreport?
>
> > On 27 янв, 20:07, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Honestly, I'm at a loss why I'd want that kind of temporary cloned
> > > functionality when you could just use live to achieve the same
> > > functionality with nowhere near the limitations of the implementation
> > > you've described here. It's also nice to be able to excise my event
> > > declarations from my dom manipulations.
>
> > > Again, I can't think of a situation where your method would be better
> > > in any way than using a live event.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 11:37 am, jay <jay.ab...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > of course if there are other things that may need to be customized
> > > > about the event(s) in question it might make more sense to pass in an
> > > > options object.
>
> > > > On Jan 27, 11:30 am, jay <jay.ab...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I thought the point was to avoid the each()? What's wrong with:
>
> > > > > $('ul li').append($('<span>Click me!</span>').click(function(){},
> > > > > true);
>
> > > > > and doing $('ul li').append($('<span>Click me!</span>').click(function
> > > > > (){});
>
> > > > > defaults the second argument to false.
>
> > > > > Or you could default it to true and it may stay more backwards-
> > > > > compatible with older versions.
>
> > > > > On Jan 27, 11:22 am, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > You can already do that using clone. I can't see a need to rewrite
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > new code when the ability already exists in the current code. If you
> > > > > > want to clone around your elements around and not apply new styles,
> > > > > > just:
>
> > > > > > $('ul li').each(function(){
> > > > > > $(this).append($('<span>Click me!</span>').click(function(){}))
>
> > > > > > });
>
> > > > > > On Jan 27, 11:14 am, jay <jay.ab...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > It's not that I prefer it. I think live()/die() makes sense
> > > > > > > because
> > > > > > > the event "lives on" for all matching selectors. What the true
> > > > > > > arguement would do it give a way to clone the element and it's
> > > > > > > handler
> > > > > > > just that one time.
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 27, 10:50 am, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Give them a different selector?
>
> > > > > > > > $('.click1').live('click', function(){});
> > > > > > > > $('.click2').live('click', function(){});
>
> > > > > > > > Would handle the problem easily. Remember, you can always add
> > > > > > > > extra,
> > > > > > > > non-style based classes which you can use as selectors for
> > > > > > > > events or
> > > > > > > > effects.
>
> > > > > > > > Also, I'm not sure I understand your objection. If I understand
> > > > > > > > correctly, you're saying you'd prefer:
>
> > > > > > > > var span = $('<span>Click me</span>').click(function(){}, true);
> > > > > > > > $('ul li').append(span);
>
> > > > > > > > Instead of:
> > > > > > > > $('ul li span').live('click', function(){});
> > > > > > > > $('ul li').append('<span>Click me</span>');
>
> > > > > > > > The live syntax is, at least in this example, shorter, more
> > > > > > > > efficient,
> > > > > > > > cleaner, and easier to use. Perhaps it's just that I'm not
> > > > > > > > understanding a situation in which I'd run into trouble using
> > > > > > > > it over
> > > > > > > > an object, kept in memory, with a forced clone(true) bound to
> > > > > > > > it. Can
> > > > > > > > you think of any?
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 27, 10:36 am, jay <jay.ab...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > live() works, but it involves extra steps. For example
> > > > > > > > > something like
> > > > > > > > > el.click(fn,true) maybe be easier to remember for some. Also
> > > > > > > > > live
> > > > > > > > > differs from what I was thinking in that it continues to bind
> > > > > > > > > events
> > > > > > > > > to the handler based on the selector. I was thinking it
> > > > > > > > > should only
> > > > > > > > > be cloned that one time (with the event handlers included).
> > > > > > > > > What if,
> > > > > > > > > for some reason, elements of a different type were added to
> > > > > > > > > the same
> > > > > > > > > "container", but had a different functionality? live()
> > > > > > > > > wouldn't
> > > > > > > > > necessarily be what you would want.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Jan 27, 10:15 am, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps there should be an optional boolean passed to the
> > > > > > > > > > > event
> > > > > > > > > > > handlers to specify carrying over event handlers like
> > > > > > > > > > > there is with
> > > > > > > > > > > the clone() method?
>
> > > > > > > > > > There is. That's exactly what live() does. You just define
> > > > > > > > > > it before
> > > > > > > > > > runtime.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Jan 27, 10:06 am, jay <jay.ab...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > It actually makes sense, because you've only created one
> > > > > > > > > > > element here:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > var handle = $('<span>Click me</span>');
>
> > > > > > > > > > > By doing append() on a set of elements using this one
> > > > > > > > > > > element, it may
> > > > > > > > > > > be implying you would like to clone this element for the
> > > > > > > > > > > elements
> > > > > > > > > > > after the first one, but it's not completely obvious.
> > > > > > > > > > > Something that
> > > > > > > > > > > may make more sense is that the one element ends up in
> > > > > > > > > > > the very last
> > > > > > > > > > > <li>. Perhaps there should be an optional boolean passed
> > > > > > > > > > > to the event
> > > > > > > > > > > handlers to specify carrying over event handlers like
> > > > > > > > > > > there is with
> > > > > > > > > > > the clone() method?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 27, 9:48 am, errant <d.cheka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Eric, thanks for response.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it works that way, but it's kind of unflexible and
> > > > > > > > > > > > may be
> > > > > > > > > > > > impossible to implement when dealing with more complex
> > > > > > > > > > > > code, don't you
> > > > > > > > > > > > think?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 27 янв, 17:29, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe it has to do with the new event propogation
> > > > > > > > > > > > > model
> > > > > > > > > > > > > implemented with 1.3
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead, try using a living event:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <ul>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > </ul>
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > $('ul li span').live('click', function(){
> > > > > > > > > > > > > // ...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > });
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > $('ul li').append('<span>Click me</span>');
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > That should work.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 27, 8:15 am, errant <d.cheka...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the code:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > HTML:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <ul>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <li></li>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > </ul>
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > JS:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > $(function(){
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > var handle = $('<span>Click me</span>');
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > handle.click(function() {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > alert('Thanks');
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > });
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > $('ul li').append(handle);
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > });
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > With jQuery 1.2.6, each time I click on any list's
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > element it shows
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > alert. With 1.3.1 in FF3, Safari 3 & Opera 9.63
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > alert is only
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > displaying when I click on first element. In IE6,7
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything is ok.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this some kind of bug?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
