I also don't think there is any point implementing this particular
feature "unobtrusively", because in this context, "unobtrusive" has no
meaning. If javascript is disabled in the user's browser, there would
be no difference in behavior between the "unobtrusive" and the current
implementations.
-Steve Schwartz (@jangosteve)
On Oct 15, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Mislav Marohnić wrote:
On Oct 14, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Tim Shaffer wrote:
Is there any specific reason I'm not aware of that Rails still uses
inline JavaScript for this? Would there be any reception if I were
to submit a pull request for this? Never contributed to rails
before so I'm not sure. Thanks!
I don't think you should change this. The reason it was done this
way is to implement it in the easiest way possible, and that's just
adding two extra attributes and no supporting code.
Your way would require removing this behavior from Rails and
implementing it in JS. You would have to contribute to both Rails
and rails-ujs & prototype-ujs projects, because the latter implement
behaviors around data-* attributes. I don't think it's too much
work, but I think that you shuldn't try to improve this. Ones who
really care about properly doing image swapping will do so manually
and handle advanced things like preloading of images.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-
[email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on
Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
