both ways are correct.
but
$("select").change(function() {
alert( $(this).val() );
});
looks better.
.val() is function built to take advantage over .attr('value');
its always good achieve same result by with less typing.
As jQuery itsef says .. "Write Less Do More". :)
Ninad
On Oct 13, 3:05 pm, James <james.gp....@gmail.com> wrote:
> val() was built to have several advantages over attr("value") for form
> fields.
> For example, if your select element was one that allows you to select
> multiple options, using:
> attr("value")
> (or just the basic 'value' attribute for that matter)
> it will only get the first selected value. You'd have to manually loop
> through the options to get the selected options. It was meant to work
> almost exactly like the JS core 'value' attribute.
> But if you use:
> val()
> you would get an array of all the selected values. It's built for you
> already in jQuery.
>
> If you only have a select element that allows one selection, then it
> probably doesn't matter much. Either one should work correctly in
> most, if not all, browsers.
>
> On Oct 13, 11:24 am, Evgeny Bobovik <bobo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Why not?? I think that this method is most correctly from all:)
> > Gk___
>
> > 2009/10/13 MorningZ <morni...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > why not just use
>
> > > $("select").change(function() {
> > > alert( $(this).val() );
> > > });
>
> > > On Oct 13, 11:06 am, Evgeny Bobovik <bobo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> fist and second methods are correct? but this:
> > >> $("select").change(function() {
>
> > >> alert($(this).attr("value"));
>
> > >> });
> > >> method will worked correctly in all browsers!
> > >> Gk___
>
> > >> 2009/10/13 Mike <mgor...@gmail.com>:
>
> > >> > $("select").change(function() {
>
> > >> > alert($(this).attr("value"));
>
> > >> > });
