That's when you add a flag that when true includes CSS... I mean if the whole point of using a framework is for simplicity that would surely cover it. On Jun 9, 2013 1:07 PM, "Walter Lee Davis" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Phil Petree wrote: > > > This just seems really, really odd... THATS where they decide to draw > the line? LOL > > I believe this architectural decision was made at a time in history when > introspecting the CSS cascade to discover if an element was actually > visible at the moment was really slow in JavaScript, or really complex from > a cross-browser perspective. > > There is also the legacy of Rails' RJS system to consider here. (I've been > on this list long enough to remember when it was called > rubyonrails-spinoffs or something like that.) A lot of the core assumptions > of this library have their basis in how Rails 1.x decided Web2.0 should > look and behave. > > I don't know the exact source of this decision, but I have had it cited as > gospel to me in the past. Just kicking that can down the road... > > Walter > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]. > Visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
