[jQuery] jQuery Form Plugin and Validation Form

[Freud]

Hi,

first of all, excuse me for my language, I'm french ;) so I'll try to
make it simple...

I'm using the JQuery Form Plugin and it works perfectly fine :

$(document).ready(function() {
var options2 = {
target:"#alertes",
url:  "soa.php?action=modif"
};

$("#interv").submit(function() {
$(this).ajaxSubmit(options2);
return false;
});
});

I tried the validation form plugin, which is quite amazing, and it
also works great.

$(document).ready(function() {
$.validator.setDefaults({
errorContainer: $("#alertes"),
errorLabelContainer: $("#alertes ul"),
errorWrapper: "li",
rules: {
   int_societe: { required: true }
  },
  messages: {
int_societe: "Test soc"
}
//,submitHandler: function(form) {$
("#interv").ajaxSubmit(options2);},
   });
  $("#interv").validate();
});


Now, I wanna use both. That's where it started to go wrong. When I
uncomment the SubmitHandler line, the validation is still OK but the
form is submitted normally, not using the Ajaxian method.

Could someone help me on this case ? I spent my night on this stuff
and I start feeling depressed :)

Thx,
Freud

[jQuery] Re: stop animation

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

But how does this help in stopping animations?

-GTG


On 8/15/07, eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I find a good plugin jQuery Timers (http://jquery.offput.ca/every/)
>
>
> On 8月6日, 下午12时01分, "Ganeshji Marwaha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thanks eddy... I will try to make them work together and will let u know
> how
> > it goes.
> >
> > -GTG
> >
> > On 8/5/07, eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > The demo page ishttp://interface.eyecon.ro/demos/animate.html
> > > You only need to make jQuery and fx together.
> > > On 8月4日, 下午12时40分, "Ganeshji Marwaha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > hi friends,
> >
> > > > is there a way to stop an animation after it has started? any hack
> that
> > > will
> > > > make this happen will be useful...
> >
> > > > thanks in advance,
> > > > -GTG
>
>

[jQuery] Re: display "Please wait" while waiting for a database query.

[SeViR]

:-D. Really this is my REAL code using block :-P

The problem with blockUI that I have, it is that my hidden layer is
removed when I call to $.unblockUI, so I simply send a copy of the
layer when I call to $.blockUI ;-)

//Configuration for AJAX calls
$().ajaxSend(function(r,s){
   $("#msgpanel div").html(msg.send);
   $.blockUI($("#msgpanel").clone());
});

$().ajaxStop(function(r,s){
   if (!message_shown){$.unblockUI();}
});

$().ajaxError(function(r,s){
   $("#msgpanel div").html();
   setTimeout("$.unblockUI()",6000);
});

seedy escribió:

there is a great plugin that will do this for you called blockUI
http://www.malsup.com/jquery/block/


VS YR wrote:
  

  



--
Best Regards,
José Francisco Rives Lirola 

SeViR CW · Computer Design
http://www.sevir.org
 
Murcia - Spain

[jQuery] Re: stop animation

[eddy]

I find a good plugin jQuery Timers (http://jquery.offput.ca/every/)


On 8月6日, 下午12时01分, "Ganeshji Marwaha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks eddy... I will try to make them work together and will let u know how
> it goes.
>
> -GTG
>
> On 8/5/07, eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The demo page ishttp://interface.eyecon.ro/demos/animate.html
> > You only need to make jQuery and fx together.
> > On 8月4日, 下午12时40分, "Ganeshji Marwaha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > hi friends,
>
> > > is there a way to stop an animation after it has started? any hack that
> > will
> > > make this happen will be useful...
>
> > > thanks in advance,
> > > -GTG

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[John Resig]

Haha, you almost had me frightened there ("does he know something that
I don't?").

But yeah, the Learning jQuery Book is definitely a different brand of baby.

--John

On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, don't I look like a dumbass :)  I apparently was referring to this
> post that I guess I never actually read:
> http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/f1706b9f5c1da82b/fdf9ac5f7e90d1eb?lnk=gst&q=resig&rnum=41#fdf9ac5f7e90d1eb
>
> I need sleep...
>
>
> On 8/16/07, Karl Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm guessing he's getting you confused with Dries, of Drupal fame. :)
> >
> > Karl Rudd
> >
> > On 8/16/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have a kid? I sure hope not! :-)
> > >
> > > --John
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Ok, I had my kid back in January and I am just recently getting time
> to work
> > > > on my side projects.  So where, after only, what, a month or so are
> you
> > > > getting the time and energy to patch things so quickly?
> > > >
> > > > I will try to grab that version tonight, if not, sometime tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of SVN
> > > > > to give it a try (but the test case passes).
> > > > >
> > > > > --John
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to
> often)
> > > > when
> > > > > > I started running into the problem figure I was not following
> standards.
> > > > > > And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but
> prepend
> > > > > > errored out where prependTo did not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see
> if I
> > > > can
> > > > > > find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more"
> to
> > > > "doing
> > > > > > shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for your help guys.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --Erik
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > > > > > > > table-related things work properly.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > > > > > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --John
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > > > > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep
> > > > erroring
> > > > > > out on
> > > > > > > > > > $('').append('');  Is
> caption
> > > > > > supported?
> > > > > > > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery
> indirectly
> > > > uses
> > > > > > > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees,
> which
> > > > means
> > > > > > > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According
> to
> > > > this
> > > > > > > > > site:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY
> (if
> > > > any).
> > > > > > > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i
> couldn't
> > > > get
> > > > > > > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially
> tollerant
> > > > > > > > > ( i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > > > > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted
> complaining
> > > > about
> > > > > > > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your
> > > > append(caption)
> > > > > > > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working
> because
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But
> that's a
> > > > > > > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table,
> before
> > > > you
> > > > > > > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > > > > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > > > > > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > 

[jQuery] IE Errors

[Eridius]

http://www.apex-wowguild.com/dev/

everything work great in FF but IE Thickbox boes not always close when it
should.  Tabbs does seem to work at all and i do have teh bgiframe loaded. 
my caledar does not also working.  Anyone knoe anything on these issue, my
HTML is not totally valid but the invalid part does not look like it would
effect anything.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/IE-Errors-tf4277548s15494.html#a12175376
Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Erik Beeson]

Hah. Awesome.

"John's kid: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."


On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, don't I look like a dumbass :)  I apparently was referring to this
> post that I guess I never actually read:
> http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/f1706b9f5c1da82b/fdf9ac5f7e90d1eb?lnk=gst&q=resig&rnum=41#fdf9ac5f7e90d1eb
>
> I need sleep...
>
> On 8/16/07, Karl Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm guessing he's getting you confused with Dries, of Drupal fame. :)
> >
> > Karl Rudd
> >
> > On 8/16/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have a kid? I sure hope not! :-)
> > >
> > > --John
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > Ok, I had my kid back in January and I am just recently getting time
> > to work
> > > > on my side projects.  So where, after only, what, a month or so are
> > you
> > > > getting the time and energy to patch things so quickly?
> > > >
> > > > I will try to grab that version tonight, if not, sometime tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of
> > SVN
> > > > > to give it a try (but the test case passes).
> > > > >
> > > > > --John
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to
> > often)
> > > > when
> > > > > > I started running into the problem figure I was not following
> > standards.
> > > > > > And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but
> > prepend
> > > > > > errored out where prependTo did not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to
> > see if I
> > > > can
> > > > > > find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more"
> > to
> > > > "doing
> > > > > > shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for your help guys.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --Erik
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to
> > make
> > > > > > > > table-related things work properly.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > > > > > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --John
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > > > > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery
> > keep
> > > > erroring
> > > > > > out on
> > > > > > > > > > $('').append('');  Is caption
> > > > > > supported?
> > > > > > > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery
> > indirectly
> > > > uses
> > > > > > > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees,
> > which
> > > > means
> > > > > > > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you.
> > According to
> > > > this
> > > > > > > > > site:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before
> > TBODY (if
> > > > any).
> > > > > > > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i
> > couldn't
> > > > get
> > > > > > > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially
> > tollerant
> > > > > > > > > ( i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > > > > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted
> > complaining
> > > > about
> > > > > > > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your
> > > > append(caption)
> > > > > > > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working
> > because
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But
> > that's a
> > > > > > > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table,
> > before
> > > > you
> > > > > > > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > > > > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > > > > > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > > http://www.K

[jQuery] Re: Updated Plugin: jQuery Timers. jQuery-oriented setTimeout/setInterval

[Blair Mitchelmore]

The point of WTFPL is exactly that: the user can do *whatever* the
fuck they want with it. Anything. That includes taking it and
shamelessly saying they developed it whole cloth or selling it to
unsuspecting users who could get it for free with no strings attached
if they knew better. It also means they can take it and rerelease it
under a completely different more restrictive licence. Really the
WTFPL is a parody/satire licence which pokes fun at the verbose open
source licencing agreements but it's legally valid given the lack of
limitations. Having said that and admitting the trapdoors people can
take to co-opt the spirit of the licence (which is why the GPL is so
verbose) I still think it's a little lame that google does that. I
understand their position, but it's lame.

-blair

On Aug 15, 3:54 pm, Bernd Matzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Google take the *very* strong view of licence prolifiration and warned
> > me that if I didn't change back to one of the 8 licences that they
> > have listed my project would be thrown off their site.
>
> Interesting. Doesn't the MIT license, which jQuery itself is licensed
> under, provide a max of freedom, except of course for keeping the
> license information and a reference to the original author? The latter
> seems absolutely appropriate if someone wants to use the author's
> work, and the disclaimer would keep any author from legal issues. So,
> while the WTFPL is an intruiging approach, wouldn't the MIT license
> achieve what you, and Blair have in mind when licensing under WTFPL?
>
> Bernd

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Benjamin Sterling]

Well, don't I look like a dumbass :)  I apparently was referring to this
post that I guess I never actually read:
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/f1706b9f5c1da82b/fdf9ac5f7e90d1eb?lnk=gst&q=resig&rnum=41#fdf9ac5f7e90d1eb

I need sleep...

On 8/16/07, Karl Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I'm guessing he's getting you confused with Dries, of Drupal fame. :)
>
> Karl Rudd
>
> On 8/16/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I have a kid? I sure hope not! :-)
> >
> > --John
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Ok, I had my kid back in January and I am just recently getting time
> to work
> > > on my side projects.  So where, after only, what, a month or so are
> you
> > > getting the time and energy to patch things so quickly?
> > >
> > > I will try to grab that version tonight, if not, sometime tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of SVN
> > > > to give it a try (but the test case passes).
> > > >
> > > > --John
> > > >
> > > > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to
> often)
> > > when
> > > > > I started running into the problem figure I was not following
> standards.
> > > > > And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but
> prepend
> > > > > errored out where prependTo did not.
> > > > >
> > > > > @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see
> if I
> > > can
> > > > > find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
> > > > >
> > > > > @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more"
> to
> > > "doing
> > > > > shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your help guys.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --Erik
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > > > > > > table-related things work properly.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > > > > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --John
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > > > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep
> > > erroring
> > > > > out on
> > > > > > > > > $('').append('');  Is caption
> > > > > supported?
> > > > > > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery
> indirectly
> > > uses
> > > > > > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees,
> which
> > > means
> > > > > > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According
> to
> > > this
> > > > > > > > site:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY
> (if
> > > any).
> > > > > > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i
> couldn't
> > > get
> > > > > > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially
> tollerant
> > > > > > > > ( i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > > > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted
> complaining
> > > about
> > > > > > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your
> > > append(caption)
> > > > > > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working
> because
> > > the
> > > > > > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But
> that's a
> > > > > > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table,
> before
> > > you
> > > > > > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > > > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > > > > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
> >
>



-- 
Benjamin Sterling
http://www.KenzoMedia.com
http://www.KenzoHosting.com

[jQuery] Re: Quick question...

[MikeR]

I just threw together a few regular expressions in PHP that'll do
*this* job I want not elegant, nor very re-usable.. but I'm going
to keep searching for a decent PHP HTML parser in the meantime.
Thanks, Matt! Anybody else want to chime in please do.

On Aug 15, 8:41 pm, "Matt Stith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe there is a PECL extension called DOMParser or something like that,
> i find it during my hunt, but the server i was working on wouldnt allow me
> to install it.. Oh well.. Had to write myself a table parser.. fun.
>
> On 8/15/07, MikeR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Unfortunately, I haven't found one either... obviously. It's quite
> > difficult finding a decent HTML parser in PHP. Oh well... guess I can
> > still dream about one.
>
> > On Aug 15, 7:29 pm, "Matt Stith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I highly doubt something like that exists. I had trouble finding an HTML
> > > parser in any form for php, let alone one with the rich feature set of
> > > jQuery. Good luck on your hunt!
>
> > > On 8/15/07, MikeR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > We all know & love jQuery, but something that I've been wondering for
> > > > a while now... not sure if it's feasible or not, but I'll ask anyway
> > > > =).
>
> > > > Is there any sort of HTML parser for PHP that's similar to jQuery's
> > > > selectors?
>
> > > > ie: $('div.class').html().. but a PHP version?
>
> > > > Thanks!

[jQuery] Re: Fwd: jQuery and UTF8

[barophobia]

On 8/15/07, pd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I can't be sure this will help, but does your server side script
> return the document with specifically with a utf8 charset header?

Well, hopefully this is the right way...

According to Firebug, the Response Headers for the document that is
loaded through .load() are:

Response Headers
DateThu, 16 Aug 2007 04:13:42 GMT
Server  Apache/2.0.54 (Unix) PHP/4.4.7 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e
mod_fastcgi/2.4.2 DAV/2 SVN/1.4.2
X-Powered-ByPHP/5.2.2
Expires Thu, 19 Nov 1981 08:52:00 GMT
Cache-Control   no-store, no-cache, must-revalidate, post-check=0, pre-check=0
Pragma  no-cache
VaryAccept-Encoding
Content-Encodinggzip
Content-Length  427
Keep-Alive  timeout=15, max=86
Connection  Keep-Alive
Content-Typetext/html

Does that give you a clue?



Thanks,
Chris.

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Karl Rudd]

I'm guessing he's getting you confused with Dries, of Drupal fame. :)

Karl Rudd

On 8/16/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have a kid? I sure hope not! :-)
>
> --John
>
> On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ok, I had my kid back in January and I am just recently getting time to work
> > on my side projects.  So where, after only, what, a month or so are you
> > getting the time and energy to patch things so quickly?
> >
> > I will try to grab that version tonight, if not, sometime tomorrow.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of SVN
> > > to give it a try (but the test case passes).
> > >
> > > --John
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to often)
> > when
> > > > I started running into the problem figure I was not following standards.
> > > > And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but prepend
> > > > errored out where prependTo did not.
> > > >
> > > > @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see if I
> > can
> > > > find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
> > > >
> > > > @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more" to
> > "doing
> > > > shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your help guys.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> > > > >
> > > > > --Erik
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > > > > > table-related things work properly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > > > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --John
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep
> > erroring
> > > > out on
> > > > > > > > $('').append('');  Is caption
> > > > supported?
> > > > > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly
> > uses
> > > > > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which
> > means
> > > > > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to
> > this
> > > > > > > site:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if
> > any).
> > > > > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't
> > get
> > > > > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> > > > > > > ( i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining
> > about
> > > > > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your
> > append(caption)
> > > > > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because
> > the
> > > > > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> > > > > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before
> > you
> > > > > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > > > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Benjamin Sterling
> > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
>

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[John Resig]

I have a kid? I sure hope not! :-)

--John

On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, I had my kid back in January and I am just recently getting time to work
> on my side projects.  So where, after only, what, a month or so are you
> getting the time and energy to patch things so quickly?
>
> I will try to grab that version tonight, if not, sometime tomorrow.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of SVN
> > to give it a try (but the test case passes).
> >
> > --John
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to often)
> when
> > > I started running into the problem figure I was not following standards.
> > > And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but prepend
> > > errored out where prependTo did not.
> > >
> > > @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see if I
> can
> > > find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
> > >
> > > @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more" to
> "doing
> > > shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help guys.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> > > >
> > > > --Erik
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8/15/07, John Resig < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > > > > table-related things work properly.
> > > > >
> > > > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > > > >
> > > > > --John
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep
> erroring
> > > out on
> > > > > > > $('').append('');  Is caption
> > > supported?
> > > > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly
> uses
> > > > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which
> means
> > > > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to
> this
> > > > > > site:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > > > >
> > > > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if
> any).
> > > > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't
> get
> > > > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> > > > > > ( i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining
> about
> > > > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your
> append(caption)
> > > > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because
> the
> > > > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> > > > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before
> you
> > > > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Benjamin Sterling
> > > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Benjamin Sterling
> http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> http://www.KenzoHosting.com

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Benjamin Sterling]

Ok, I had my kid back in January and I am just recently getting time to work
on my side projects.  So where, after only, what, a month or so are you
getting the time and energy to patch things so quickly?

I will try to grab that version tonight, if not, sometime tomorrow.

Thanks.

On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of SVN
> to give it a try (but the test case passes).
>
> --John
>
> On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to often)
> when
> > I started running into the problem figure I was not following standards.
> > And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but prepend
> > errored out where prependTo did not.
> >
> > @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see if I
> can
> > find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
> >
> > @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more" to
> "doing
> > shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
> >
> > Thanks for your help guys.
> >
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> > >
> > > --Erik
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > > > table-related things work properly.
> > > >
> > > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > > >
> > > > --John
> > > >
> > > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > Hey,
> > > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep
> erroring
> > out on
> > > > > > $('').append('');  Is caption
> > supported?
> > > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly
> uses
> > > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which
> means
> > > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to
> this
> > > > > site:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > > >
> > > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if
> any).
> > > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't
> get
> > > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> > > > > (i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > > >
> > > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining
> about
> > > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your
> append(caption)
> > > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because
> the
> > > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> > > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before
> you
> > > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Benjamin Sterling
> > http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> > http://www.KenzoHosting.com
>



-- 
Benjamin Sterling
http://www.KenzoMedia.com
http://www.KenzoHosting.com

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[John Resig]

I was feeling feisty. Fixed in SVN rev 2728. Check a copy out of SVN
to give it a try (but the test case passes).

--John

On 8/15/07, Benjamin Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> @Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to often) when
> I started running into the problem figure I was not following standards.
> And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but prepend
> errored out where prependTo did not.
>
> @John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see if I can
> find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.
>
> @Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more" to "doing
> shady trickery so you don't have to." :)
>
> Thanks for your help guys.
>
>
> On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
> >
> > --Erik
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > >
> > > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > > table-related things work properly.
> > >
> > > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > > http://dev.jquery.com/
> > >
> > > --John
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > > < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Hey,
> > > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep erroring
> out on
> > > > > $('').append('');  Is caption
> supported?
> > > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > > >
> > > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly uses
> > > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which means
> > > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to this
> > > > site:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > > >
> > > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if any).
> > > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't get
> > > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> > > > (i.e., not compliant) here.
> > > >
> > > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining about
> > > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your append(caption)
> > > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because the
> > > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> > > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before you
> > > > append the caption/tbody.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Benjamin Sterling
> http://www.KenzoMedia.com
> http://www.KenzoHosting.com

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Benjamin Sterling]

@Stephan:  That is actually the first site I went to (and go to often) when
I started running into the problem figure I was not following standards.
And I tried the prepend and prependTo and neither worked, but prepend
errored out where prependTo did not.

@John:  Will do, I want to experiment on a few more things to see if I can
find a work around, either way I will post it sometime tonight.

@Erik: Are you suggesting we should change "write less. do more" to "doing
shady trickery so you don't have to." :)

Thanks for your help guys.

On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."
>
> --Erik
>
>
> On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> >
> > That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> > table-related things work properly.
> >
> > @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> > http://dev.jquery.com/
> >
> > --John
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hey,
> > > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep erroring
> > out on
> > > > $('').append('');  Is caption supported?
> > > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> > >
> > > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly uses
> > > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which means
> > > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to this
> > > site:
> > >
> > > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> > >
> > > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if any).
> > > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't get
> > > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> > > (i.e., not compliant) here.
> > >
> > > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > > automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining about
> > > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your append(caption)
> > > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because the
> > > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> > > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before you
> > > append the caption/tbody.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>


-- 
Benjamin Sterling
http://www.KenzoMedia.com
http://www.KenzoHosting.com

[jQuery] Re: Quick question...

[Matt Stith]

I believe there is a PECL extension called DOMParser or something like that,
i find it during my hunt, but the server i was working on wouldnt allow me
to install it.. Oh well.. Had to write myself a table parser.. fun.

On 8/15/07, MikeR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't found one either... obviously. It's quite
> difficult finding a decent HTML parser in PHP. Oh well... guess I can
> still dream about one.
>
> On Aug 15, 7:29 pm, "Matt Stith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I highly doubt something like that exists. I had trouble finding an HTML
> > parser in any form for php, let alone one with the rich feature set of
> > jQuery. Good luck on your hunt!
> >
> > On 8/15/07, MikeR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > We all know & love jQuery, but something that I've been wondering for
> > > a while now... not sure if it's feasible or not, but I'll ask anyway
> > > =).
> >
> > > Is there any sort of HTML parser for PHP that's similar to jQuery's
> > > selectors?
> >
> > > ie: $('div.class').html().. but a PHP version?
> >
> > > Thanks!
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Quick question...

[MikeR]

Unfortunately, I haven't found one either... obviously. It's quite
difficult finding a decent HTML parser in PHP. Oh well... guess I can
still dream about one.

On Aug 15, 7:29 pm, "Matt Stith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I highly doubt something like that exists. I had trouble finding an HTML
> parser in any form for php, let alone one with the rich feature set of
> jQuery. Good luck on your hunt!
>
> On 8/15/07, MikeR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > We all know & love jQuery, but something that I've been wondering for
> > a while now... not sure if it's feasible or not, but I'll ask anyway
> > =).
>
> > Is there any sort of HTML parser for PHP that's similar to jQuery's
> > selectors?
>
> > ie: $('div.class').html().. but a PHP version?
>
> > Thanks!

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Erik Beeson]

"jQuery: doing shady trickery so you don't have to."

--Erik


On 8/15/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
> table-related things work properly.
>
> @Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
> http://dev.jquery.com/
>
> --John
>
> On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hey,
> > > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep erroring out
> on
> > > $('').append('');  Is caption supported?
> > > $('').append(''); works fine.
> >
> > it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly uses
> > the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which means
> > that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to this
> > site:
> >
> > http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
> >
> > the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if any).
> > But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't get
> > it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> > (i.e., not compliant) here.
> >
> > My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> > automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining about
> > that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your append(caption)
> > will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because the
> > tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> > guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before you
> > append the caption/tbody.
> >
> >
> >
>

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[John Resig]

That being said, we have to do a lot of shady trickery to make
table-related things work properly.

@Benjamin: You should file a bug on this:
http://dev.jquery.com/

--John

On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hey,
> > I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep erroring out on
> > $('').append('');  Is caption supported?
> > $('').append(''); works fine.
>
> it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly uses
> the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which means
> that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to this
> site:
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp
>
> the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if any).
> But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't get
> it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
> (i.e., not compliant) here.
>
> My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining about
> that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your append(caption)
> will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because the
> tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before you
> append the caption/tbody.
>
>
>

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Stephan Beal]

On Aug 16, 4:20 am, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
> automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining about
> that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your append(caption)
> will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because the
> tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
> guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before you
> append the caption/tbody.

PS: if that's the problem, try adding your caption using prepend()
instead of append(). That may work around the problem of the
automatically generated tbody.

[jQuery] Re: supported?

[Stephan Beal]

On Aug 16, 3:56 am, "Benjamin Sterling"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey,
> I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep erroring out on
> $('').append('');  Is caption supported?
> $('').append(''); works fine.

it's not jQuery which is ignoring your request. jQuery indirectly uses
the browser's internal facilities for creating DOM trees, which means
that the browser's engine is the one denying you. According to this
site:

http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_caption.asp

the caption must be the first tag after TABLE, before TBODY (if any).
But after some experimentation via their "try it" link, i couldn't get
it to fail either way, but maybe konqueror is especially tollerant
(i.e., not compliant) here.

My guess is that when you create your  the TBODY is
automatically getting added to it (someone posted complaining about
that behaviour a few days ago), which means that your append(caption)
will fail and your append(tbody) is actually NOT working because the
tbody is already in the table when that is reached. But that's a
guess. Try inspecting the dom after you create the table, before you
append the caption/tbody.

[jQuery] Re: [ANNOUNCE] tablesorter 2.0 released

[Sean Catchpole]

Looks great Christian. I've been using tablesorter for a while, very useful
for adding quick sort functionality.

~Sean

[jQuery] Re: Documentation on $('#foo')[0] or $('#foo').get(0) ??

[Erik Beeson]

http://docs.jquery.com/DOM/Attributes#Attr

--Erik

On 8/15/07, pd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Futher to this overall topic Eric, do you think it would be possible/
> wise to implement a jQuery method that returns any of the standard DOM
> properties? I'm just wishlisting but I think this syntax (each line a
> different example property):
>
> $('#foo').dom('className');
> $('#foo').dom('size');
> $('#foo').dom('type');
>
> would be very intuitive for developers and very consistent with the
> rest of the jQuery library.
>
> It seems more intuitive and consistent than:
>
> $('#foo')[0].className;
> $('#foo')[0].size;
> $('#foo')[0].type;
>
> to me, though maybe the method name of dom() is not the most clear and
> or explicit. It is short though :)
>
> pd
>
> On Aug 16, 11:27 am, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > id is supposed to be unique is it not? My example used the # to refer
> > > to a unique id on the page, therefore *not* an array of objects.
> >
> > Wrong, it *is* still an array of objects, it's just an array of length
> > 1. Do console.log($('#foo')) and you'll see that it is still an array,
> > and an array with one object in it is not the same as the object
> > itself.
> >
> > > AFAIK all three examples get an element on the page as a *single* (not
> > > an array) object.
> >
> > And that's wrong. The jQuery object is always an array. It's of length
> > 0 for no matches, 1 for a single match, or more for multiple matches.
> > That's by design, so that the chaining things work consistently. This
> > allows you to make chained calls that won't throw an error, regardless
> > of whether or not the selector found anything.
> >
> > > I think it's reasonable (though perhaps not programmatically correct)
> > > to see $('#foo') as the equivalent of document.getElementById('foo').
> > > If this is not true in jQuery, which it does not appear to be, all I
> >
> > Right, it's not.
> >
> > > am saying is this distinction should be clearly documented.
> >
> > Agreed. This should probably be made clearer. I think the recently
> > discussed post by Simon Willison addresses this really well (under
> > "Doing stuff with them"):http://simonwillison.net/2007/Aug/15/jquery/
> >
> > --Erik
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Documentation on $('#foo')[0] or $('#foo').get(0) ??

[pd]

Futher to this overall topic Eric, do you think it would be possible/
wise to implement a jQuery method that returns any of the standard DOM
properties? I'm just wishlisting but I think this syntax (each line a
different example property):

$('#foo').dom('className');
$('#foo').dom('size');
$('#foo').dom('type');

would be very intuitive for developers and very consistent with the
rest of the jQuery library.

It seems more intuitive and consistent than:

$('#foo')[0].className;
$('#foo')[0].size;
$('#foo')[0].type;

to me, though maybe the method name of dom() is not the most clear and
or explicit. It is short though :)

pd

On Aug 16, 11:27 am, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > id is supposed to be unique is it not? My example used the # to refer
> > to a unique id on the page, therefore *not* an array of objects.
>
> Wrong, it *is* still an array of objects, it's just an array of length
> 1. Do console.log($('#foo')) and you'll see that it is still an array,
> and an array with one object in it is not the same as the object
> itself.
>
> > AFAIK all three examples get an element on the page as a *single* (not
> > an array) object.
>
> And that's wrong. The jQuery object is always an array. It's of length
> 0 for no matches, 1 for a single match, or more for multiple matches.
> That's by design, so that the chaining things work consistently. This
> allows you to make chained calls that won't throw an error, regardless
> of whether or not the selector found anything.
>
> > I think it's reasonable (though perhaps not programmatically correct)
> > to see $('#foo') as the equivalent of document.getElementById('foo').
> > If this is not true in jQuery, which it does not appear to be, all I
>
> Right, it's not.
>
> > am saying is this distinction should be clearly documented.
>
> Agreed. This should probably be made clearer. I think the recently
> discussed post by Simon Willison addresses this really well (under
> "Doing stuff with them"):http://simonwillison.net/2007/Aug/15/jquery/
>
> --Erik

[jQuery] Re: Documentation on $('#foo')[0] or $('#foo').get(0) ??

[Erik Beeson]

Uh, thanks, you flatter me, but I'm not one of the people that edit the
wiki. I think it would be sweet if the web team got in touch with Simon and
asked him if we could pull that article into docs.jquery.com as an official
jQuery Primer. I think it focuses on the right introductory aspects of
jQuery better than the official documentation.

--Erik


On 8/15/07, pd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Eric
>
> I'll remember to consider jQuery selector results an array from now
> on.
>
> So, do you feel like updating the wiki? Sounds like you would be the
> best person to do so as your understanding appears quite deep.
>
> I had a look at Mr Willison's article yesterday but only got half way
> through before getting distracted. Bizarre that it apparently has
> something related to this topic? I will have to read the whole thing,
> it's still open in one of my tabs for when I get the time :)
>
> pd
>
> On Aug 16, 11:27 am, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > id is supposed to be unique is it not? My example used the # to refer
> > > to a unique id on the page, therefore *not* an array of objects.
> >
> > Wrong, it *is* still an array of objects, it's just an array of length
> > 1. Do console.log($('#foo')) and you'll see that it is still an array,
> > and an array with one object in it is not the same as the object
> > itself.
> >
> > > AFAIK all three examples get an element on the page as a *single* (not
> > > an array) object.
> >
> > And that's wrong. The jQuery object is always an array. It's of length
> > 0 for no matches, 1 for a single match, or more for multiple matches.
> > That's by design, so that the chaining things work consistently. This
> > allows you to make chained calls that won't throw an error, regardless
> > of whether or not the selector found anything.
> >
> > > I think it's reasonable (though perhaps not programmatically correct)
> > > to see $('#foo') as the equivalent of document.getElementById('foo').
> > > If this is not true in jQuery, which it does not appear to be, all I
> >
> > Right, it's not.
> >
> > > am saying is this distinction should be clearly documented.
> >
> > Agreed. This should probably be made clearer. I think the recently
> > discussed post by Simon Willison addresses this really well (under
> > "Doing stuff with them"):http://simonwillison.net/2007/Aug/15/jquery/
> >
> > --Erik
>
>

[jQuery] supported?

[Benjamin Sterling]

Hey,
I am trying to build a table dynamically, but jQuery keep erroring out on
$('').append('');  Is caption supported?
$('').append(''); works fine.

-- 
Benjamin Sterling
http://www.KenzoMedia.com
http://www.KenzoHosting.com

[jQuery] Re: Documentation on $('#foo')[0] or $('#foo').get(0) ??

[pd]

Thanks Eric

I'll remember to consider jQuery selector results an array from now
on.

So, do you feel like updating the wiki? Sounds like you would be the
best person to do so as your understanding appears quite deep.

I had a look at Mr Willison's article yesterday but only got half way
through before getting distracted. Bizarre that it apparently has
something related to this topic? I will have to read the whole thing,
it's still open in one of my tabs for when I get the time :)

pd

On Aug 16, 11:27 am, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > id is supposed to be unique is it not? My example used the # to refer
> > to a unique id on the page, therefore *not* an array of objects.
>
> Wrong, it *is* still an array of objects, it's just an array of length
> 1. Do console.log($('#foo')) and you'll see that it is still an array,
> and an array with one object in it is not the same as the object
> itself.
>
> > AFAIK all three examples get an element on the page as a *single* (not
> > an array) object.
>
> And that's wrong. The jQuery object is always an array. It's of length
> 0 for no matches, 1 for a single match, or more for multiple matches.
> That's by design, so that the chaining things work consistently. This
> allows you to make chained calls that won't throw an error, regardless
> of whether or not the selector found anything.
>
> > I think it's reasonable (though perhaps not programmatically correct)
> > to see $('#foo') as the equivalent of document.getElementById('foo').
> > If this is not true in jQuery, which it does not appear to be, all I
>
> Right, it's not.
>
> > am saying is this distinction should be clearly documented.
>
> Agreed. This should probably be made clearer. I think the recently
> discussed post by Simon Willison addresses this really well (under
> "Doing stuff with them"):http://simonwillison.net/2007/Aug/15/jquery/
>
> --Erik

[jQuery] Re: stupid dev tricks: gzipping jQuery without mod_deflate

[Erik Beeson]

Ah, good to know. In my case, we're running on our own servers, so
that isn't too big an issue. Also, we're using Java, and store the
cache files in the webapp's temporary directory, and set them to
delete on exit (java.io.File.deleteOnExit()), so they get trashed when
we restart the server.

But thanks for pointing it out for those dealing with a shared hosting
environment.

--Erik


On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 11:32 pm, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I cache the packed versions. Actually, I concatenate all of the scripts that
> > I need for a page, minify them (used to use packer, now I use YUImin), and
> > then cache that, all on the fly. So I have one script tag like:
>
> The problem with caching is that it fails on some hosting providers.
> For example, if i did this on the SourceForge servers, the cached file
> would be owned by some web user other than me, which means my account
> cannot remove the file. Writing files from a web server is often
> problematic vis-a-vis file access rights, especially when your account
> is not the one which apache runs as. It is possible to tell apache,
> with the right module(s?), to run each virtual host as a different
> user, but it's not always possible to set this up (e.g. SourceForge
> sites).
>
>
>

[jQuery] Re: stupid dev tricks: gzipping jQuery without mod_deflate

[Stephan Beal]

On Aug 15, 11:08 am, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> This approach could just as easily be used to combine all required JS
> scripts on the fly (just be sure to insert a ';' after each one to
> accommodate scripts which don't have them), then gzip them, to help
> reduce the overall download overhead.

A small follow-up:

After doing some reading, it turns out that PHP has a more efficient
manner of reading text files (which uses mem-mapping to avoid extra
string copying), called file_get_contents(). So here's a slightly
expanded version which uses that function (using fopen() and friends
would probably be optimal, though) and takes an array of JS files,
effectively concatenating the results into one script:



Happy hacking!

[jQuery] Re: Quick question...

[Matt Stith]

I highly doubt something like that exists. I had trouble finding an HTML
parser in any form for php, let alone one with the rich feature set of
jQuery. Good luck on your hunt!

On 8/15/07, MikeR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> We all know & love jQuery, but something that I've been wondering for
> a while now... not sure if it's feasible or not, but I'll ask anyway
> =).
>
> Is there any sort of HTML parser for PHP that's similar to jQuery's
> selectors?
>
> ie: $('div.class').html().. but a PHP version?
>
> Thanks!
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Documentation on $('#foo')[0] or $('#foo').get(0) ??

[Erik Beeson]

> id is supposed to be unique is it not? My example used the # to refer
> to a unique id on the page, therefore *not* an array of objects.

Wrong, it *is* still an array of objects, it's just an array of length
1. Do console.log($('#foo')) and you'll see that it is still an array,
and an array with one object in it is not the same as the object
itself.

> AFAIK all three examples get an element on the page as a *single* (not
> an array) object.

And that's wrong. The jQuery object is always an array. It's of length
0 for no matches, 1 for a single match, or more for multiple matches.
That's by design, so that the chaining things work consistently. This
allows you to make chained calls that won't throw an error, regardless
of whether or not the selector found anything.

> I think it's reasonable (though perhaps not programmatically correct)
> to see $('#foo') as the equivalent of document.getElementById('foo').
> If this is not true in jQuery, which it does not appear to be, all I

Right, it's not.

> am saying is this distinction should be clearly documented.

Agreed. This should probably be made clearer. I think the recently
discussed post by Simon Willison addresses this really well (under
"Doing stuff with them"):
http://simonwillison.net/2007/Aug/15/jquery/

--Erik

[jQuery] Selector Question should be easy (continued with online example)

[Mitch]

This doesnt work

http://www.whatbird.com/wwwroot/Components/jQuery_How_Do_I_not.html

This works

http://www.whatbird.com/wwwroot/Components/jQuery_How_Do_I_not2.html

The first example uses John's example for using not. Klaus your's
didnt work either.

Is this my stupidity again?

Mitch

[jQuery] Re: stupid dev tricks: gzipping jQuery without mod_deflate

[Stephan Beal]

On Aug 15, 11:32 pm, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I cache the packed versions. Actually, I concatenate all of the scripts that
> I need for a page, minify them (used to use packer, now I use YUImin), and
> then cache that, all on the fly. So I have one script tag like:

The problem with caching is that it fails on some hosting providers.
For example, if i did this on the SourceForge servers, the cached file
would be owned by some web user other than me, which means my account
cannot remove the file. Writing files from a web server is often
problematic vis-a-vis file access rights, especially when your account
is not the one which apache runs as. It is possible to tell apache,
with the right module(s?), to run each virtual host as a different
user, but it's not always possible to set this up (e.g. SourceForge
sites).

[jQuery] Re: stupid dev tricks: gzipping jQuery without mod_deflate

[Stephan Beal]

On Aug 15, 11:02 pm, "Ganeshji Marwaha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Very cool... I will start using this technique right away...
>
> But my only concern is, since this technique compresses the file everytime
> it is requested, isn't it an overkill on the server's CPU?

Getting this level of transparency is worth the small computational
cost, IMO. It is essentially the same as Apache using mod_deflate
(Apache 2.x) or mod_gzip (Apache 1.x). The default compression level
for the gzip algorithm performs REALLY quickly.

[jQuery] Re: Fwd: jQuery and UTF8

[pd]

I can't be sure this will help, but does your server side script
return the document with specifically with a utf8 charset header?

On Aug 16, 8:05 am, barophobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm forwarding this email again as it seems that it may not have made
> its way to the list the first time.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: barophobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:02:52 -0700
> Subject: jQuery and UTF8
> To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got some Japanese text in my MySQL database that shows up
> correctly through phpMyAdmin as well as when it is loaded directly as
> HTML.
>
> However, when I load it through .load() it only shows up as question marks.
>
> Is there an obvious solution? I couldn't find any good info on jQuery
> and UTF8 when searching.
>
> Also, when I try to add Japanese through AJAX it is saved in correctly
> in the db (as well as returned) as things like %uD0A4%uC544. It works
> fine when I enter foreign languages through a regular form and no
> AJAX.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris.

[jQuery] Re: Documentation on $('#foo')[0] or $('#foo').get(0) ??

[pd]

Hi All,

Thanks for the responses.

Firstly, everyone is assuming I am referring to an array. Not
necessarily the case. In fact in a legit XHTML 1.0 Strict document an
id is supposed to be unique is it not? My example used the # to refer
to a unique id on the page, therefore *not* an array of objects.

Secondly my question is, in part, not so much about the worth, speed,
friendliness of this code, but whether it's clearly documented.

Perhaps I am merely experiencing the simplicity of jQuery's design and
expecting it to extend further than it can? Perhaps not.

I don't understand (and I am more than willing to suggest it might be
my lack of understanding here that is the issue) why Example A (below)
and Example B (more efficient but same example) should work, but
Example C does not.

Example A

document.getElementById('foo').selectedIndex;
document.getElementById('foo').nodeName;
document.getElementById('foo').className;
document.getElementById('foo').nodeType;
document.getElementById('foo').blahProperty;
document.getElementById('foo').exampleProperty;

Example B

var fooObject = document.getElementById('foo');

fooObject.selectedIndex;
fooObject.nodeName;
fooObject.className;
fooObject.nodeType;
fooObject.blahProperty;
fooObject.exampleProperty;

Example C

$('#foo').selectedIndex;
$('#foo').nodeName;
$('#foo').className;
$('#foo').nodeType;
$('#foo').blahProperty;
$('#foo').exampleProperty;

Please don't jump on the properties I've picked, they are just taken
from Firebug and merely illustrative.

AFAIK all three examples get an element on the page as a *single* (not
an array) object.

I think it's reasonable (though perhaps not programmatically correct)
to see $('#foo') as the equivalent of document.getElementById('foo').
If this is not true in jQuery, which it does not appear to be, all I
am saying is this distinction should be clearly documented.

In an ideal world, I think it would rock to have a syntax like this:

$('#foo').anyProperty;  // for normal 'old school' DOM properties
$('#foo').jQueryMethod(); // for jQuery methods

However I'm not pretending to know the level of JS that the great Mr
John Resig knows. If the ideal world syntax is not possible or if
people don't like it, fair enough. Again my point is that there may be
a need for this topic to be documented, that's all I'm saying.
Personally I'll probably never forget again after this experience!

pd


On Aug 16, 3:43 am, "Michael Geary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: pd
>
> > I've been hacking with jQuery on and off lately and I've now
> > hit the annoying problem of not being able to access simple
> > DOM 0 properties unless, apparently, using either of the
> > following syntaxes:
>
> > $('#foo')[0]
>
> > $('#foo').get(0)
>
> pd, just to help clarify... The $() function returns an array of DOM
> elements. You access elements of an array, of course, by using [n].
>
> I don't know if I would call this an "annoying problem", it's just the way
> it is.
>
> Imagine this code:
>
>var myArray = [
>   document.getElementById('foo'),
>   document.getElementById('goo')
>];
>
> Now you have an array of two elements, [0] and [1], and each element is a
> reference to a DOM element.
>
> If you want the first element of the array, you would use:
>
>myArray[0]
>
> And you could access DOM properties with:
>
>alert( myArray[0].id );  // alerts 'foo'
>
> Or you could do:
>
>var firstElement = myArray[0];
>alert( firstElement.id );  // alerts 'foo'
>
> What you couldn't do:
>
>   alert( myArray.id );  // alerts undefined
>
> After all, myArray is not a DOM element, it's an *array* of DOM elements.
>
> A jQuery object returned by $() is no different. Whenever you see $(), think
> "array of DOM elements".
>
> (Well, it is slightly different - it is not an actual JavaScript Array
> object, but it does have .length and [n] properties so it works like an
> array for these purposes.)
>
> -Mike

[jQuery] Re: [ANNOUNCE] tablesorter 2.0 released

[Glen Lipka]

The widget system looks very interesting.  I haven't heard of a plugin for a
plugin yet.  Blazing a new trail!
Nice work!

Glen

On 8/15/07, Chris W. Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 15, 2007 4:38 PM Christian Bach said:
>
> > Hi List,
> >
> > I just released the 2.0 version of tablesorter.
>
> [snip]
>
> > Get it all at http://tablesorter.com
>
> Fantastic. Awesome. Amazing. Great.
>

[jQuery] Quick question...

[MikeR]

We all know & love jQuery, but something that I've been wondering for
a while now... not sure if it's feasible or not, but I'll ask anyway
=).

Is there any sort of HTML parser for PHP that's similar to jQuery's
selectors?

ie: $('div.class').html().. but a PHP version?

Thanks!

[jQuery] Re: NEWS: Publisher posts big chunk of Learning jQuery Chapter 7 online

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

thanks, but i already have the book ;-)

BTW, ur post is singlicate (a new english word for - it appeared only once)

-GTG

On 8/15/07, Karl Swedberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> I just noticed that our publisher (Packt) just posted a rather large
> excerpt of Learning jQuery Chapter 7 (Table Manipulation) on their site for
> all to see:
>
> http://www.packtpub.com/article/jquery-table-manipulation-part1
>
> The excerpt covers table sorting, pagination, row highlighting/striping,
> and basic tooltips.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> p.s. I kept messing up this post -- first sending to the wrong address and
> then sending from the wrong email account. Apologies if this is a duplicate
> or triplicate somehow.
>
> --Karl
> _
> Karl Swedberg
> www.englishrules.com
> www.learningjquery.com
>
>
>
>

[jQuery] Re: [ANNOUNCE] tablesorter 2.0 released

[Chris W. Parker]

On Wednesday, August 15, 2007 4:38 PM Christian Bach said:

> Hi List,
> 
> I just released the 2.0 version of tablesorter.

[snip]

> Get it all at http://tablesorter.com

Fantastic. Awesome. Amazing. Great.

[jQuery] Re: Interface slider - get value of multiple handles

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

>> I don't think you can get both values using onSlide().

That might not be true... There is a method in interface slider called
SliderGetValues() that can come to ur rescue.
I guess that is not in the docs, but it is similar to SliderSetValues() that
is documented, just that this sets whereas we want to get.

-GTG

On 8/15/07, Geoffrey Knutzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I don't think you can get both values using onSlide().
> You need to keep track of both values somewhere else and update those
> values
> as you slide.
>
> It gets tricky when the sliders cross, but you can work through it
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Simpel
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:42 AM
> To: jQuery (English)
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [jQuery] Interface slider - get value of multiple handles
>
>
> Hi there!
>
> so...I've been looking at the interface slider (http://
> interface.eyecon.ro/demos/slider.html)
>
> I'd like to use two horizontal sliders but how do I get the current
> value for them, the onSlide function only seems to display the value
> for the slider that was changed last, I wan't to be able to pull the
> values for both handles whilst dragging one of them
>
> /Joel
>
>

[jQuery] [ANNOUNCE] tablesorter 2.0 released

[Christian Bach]

Hi List,

I just released the 2.0 version of tablesorter.

Here are the highlight for this release:

* Multi-column sorting
* Parsers for sorting text, URIs, integers, currency, floats, IP addresses,
dates (ISO, long and short formats), time. Add your own easily
* Support for ROWSPAN and COLSPAN on TH elements
* Support secondary "hidden" sorting (e.g., maintain alphabetical sort when
sorting on other criteria)
* Extensibility via widget system
* Small code size (7,4kb packed)
* Documentation

Get it all at http://tablesorter.com

Regards
Christian

[jQuery] NEWS: Publisher posts big chunk of Learning jQuery Chapter 7 online

[Karl Swedberg]

Hey everyone,

I just noticed that our publisher (Packt) just posted a rather large  
excerpt of Learning jQuery Chapter 7 (Table Manipulation) on their  
site for all to see:


http://www.packtpub.com/article/jquery-table-manipulation-part1

The excerpt covers table sorting, pagination, row highlighting/ 
striping, and basic tooltips.


Enjoy!

p.s. I kept messing up this post -- first sending to the wrong  
address and then sending from the wrong email account. Apologies if  
this is a duplicate or triplicate somehow.


--Karl
_
Karl Swedberg
www.englishrules.com
www.learningjquery.com

[jQuery] Re: Delayed ready configuration

[Larry Garfield]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:20:17 -0700, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I'm saying is, window.load is like your "reallydone". It happens after
> all of the document.ready stuff is done. I suggest you do all of your
> hooking up stuff in document.ready, and do the animations in window.load.
> You can keep content from flashing by hiding it in a document.ready, or
> even
> better, just hide it with CSS.

CSS hiding isn't an option because it has to degrade gracefully.  I'm also 
trying to avoid splitting each effect up in to multiple pieces, for 
maintainability.  (The functionality keeps changing on some of them.  Yay 
clients!)

I'll see what happens if I use window.load for one or the other, though.

> If you really want to do your hooking up stuff after the animation, I
> suggest you just use an animation callback. You can still define stuff in
> separate files:
> 
> hookerUper.js:
> function doHookUpStuff() {
>  
> }
> 
> introAnimations.js:
> $(...).animate(..., doHookUpStuff);
> 
> --Erik

Right, that's what I'm suggesting doing.  Only doHookUpStuff() would just 
contain a trigger for the other event, because I can't easily merge all of the 
hook up into one function.  

--Larry Garfield

> 
> 
> On 8/15/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, they start by hiding various page elements and then fading them
> back
>> in, sometimes in weird ways.  So I need the hiding part to happen as
> soon as
>> possible so that there's no "flicker of content".  document.ready()
> hasn't
>> caused me any problems in that regard so far when the animations are the
>> only thing on the page.  That's what leads me to think that it's a sync
>> issue with all the other code that's now running.
>>
>> --Larry Garfield
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:56:50 -0700, "Erik Beeson"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > You might try moving your opening animations to
>> $(window).load(function()
>> > {...});
>> >
>> > --Erik
>> >
>> >
>> > On 8/15/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Good  jQuery.
>> >>
>> >> I have a site where I have a series of animations that need to run on
>> >> load.  I also have a large number of other events that happen on load
>> to
>> >> setup various other effects and animations and modal popups and other
>> >> goodness.  Individually, I have all of them working (yay!).  However,
>> > when I
>> >> put them all together in the page the opening animation is very herky
>> > jerky
>> >> (boo!).  I'm assuming that's because the animation happens on ticks,
>> and
>> >> ticks are delayed by other non-trivial hookup functions that are
>> running
>> > on
>> >> $(document).ready().  So I'm having, essentially, thread sync issues
>> > (yay!).
>> >>
>> >> Since none of the other hookup functions really *have* to happen
>> >> immediately, but could happen after the opening animation (presumably
>> no
>> > one
>> >> is going to be clicking on links while parts of the page are still
>> > fading
>> >> in), my thinking is to simply have the hookups not fire on
>> > document.readybut on
>> >> animation.complete.  They're all residing in different files,
> however,
>> > and
>> >> merging everything into one big script would be a huge hassle as well
>> as
>> >> much more brittle code.  I also want to keep it modular so that I
> don't
>> > have
>> >> to hard-code every init function into the animation routines.
>> >>
>> >> Sooo...
>> >>
>> >> My plan at this point is to introduce a new event,
>> >> document.animationIsDoneSoPageIsReallyReady (or something less silly
>> >> sounding), and have the other hookups fire on that event instead.  So
>> > the
>> >> code would look like:
>> >>
>> >> $(document).ready(function() {
>> >>   // Do animation stuff here.
>> >>
>> >>   $(document).trigger('reallydone');
>> >> });
>> >>
>> >> // in another file
>> >> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>> >>   // Hook up jqModal.
>> >> });
>> >>
>> >> // in another file
>> >> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>> >>   // Hook up a different jqModal.
>> >> });
>> >>
>> >> // in another file
>> >> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>> >>   // Hook up some scrolling effects and other weirdness.
>> >> });
>> >>
>> >> So my questions to the audience are:
>> >>
>> >> 1) Is my analysis of the problem correct?
>> >>
>> >> 2) Is this a reasonable way to go about solving it?
>> >>
>> >> 3) Is my code sample above somewhat vaguely accurate?
>> >>
>> >> 4) Any suggestions or gotchas that could save me some hair? :-)
>> >>
>> >> Many thanks.
>> >>
>> >> --Larry Garfield

[jQuery] Re: Delayed ready configuration

[Erik Beeson]

What I'm saying is, window.load is like your "reallydone". It happens after
all of the document.ready stuff is done. I suggest you do all of your
hooking up stuff in document.ready, and do the animations in window.load.
You can keep content from flashing by hiding it in a document.ready, or even
better, just hide it with CSS.

If you really want to do your hooking up stuff after the animation, I
suggest you just use an animation callback. You can still define stuff in
separate files:

hookerUper.js:
function doHookUpStuff() {
 
}

introAnimations.js:
$(...).animate(..., doHookUpStuff);

--Erik


On 8/15/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Well, they start by hiding various page elements and then fading them back
> in, sometimes in weird ways.  So I need the hiding part to happen as soon as
> possible so that there's no "flicker of content".  document.ready() hasn't
> caused me any problems in that regard so far when the animations are the
> only thing on the page.  That's what leads me to think that it's a sync
> issue with all the other code that's now running.
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:56:50 -0700, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > You might try moving your opening animations to
> $(window).load(function()
> > {...});
> >
> > --Erik
> >
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Good  jQuery.
> >>
> >> I have a site where I have a series of animations that need to run on
> >> load.  I also have a large number of other events that happen on load
> to
> >> setup various other effects and animations and modal popups and other
> >> goodness.  Individually, I have all of them working (yay!).  However,
> > when I
> >> put them all together in the page the opening animation is very herky
> > jerky
> >> (boo!).  I'm assuming that's because the animation happens on ticks,
> and
> >> ticks are delayed by other non-trivial hookup functions that are
> running
> > on
> >> $(document).ready().  So I'm having, essentially, thread sync issues
> > (yay!).
> >>
> >> Since none of the other hookup functions really *have* to happen
> >> immediately, but could happen after the opening animation (presumably
> no
> > one
> >> is going to be clicking on links while parts of the page are still
> > fading
> >> in), my thinking is to simply have the hookups not fire on
> > document.readybut on
> >> animation.complete.  They're all residing in different files, however,
> > and
> >> merging everything into one big script would be a huge hassle as well
> as
> >> much more brittle code.  I also want to keep it modular so that I don't
> > have
> >> to hard-code every init function into the animation routines.
> >>
> >> Sooo...
> >>
> >> My plan at this point is to introduce a new event,
> >> document.animationIsDoneSoPageIsReallyReady (or something less silly
> >> sounding), and have the other hookups fire on that event instead.  So
> > the
> >> code would look like:
> >>
> >> $(document).ready(function() {
> >>   // Do animation stuff here.
> >>
> >>   $(document).trigger('reallydone');
> >> });
> >>
> >> // in another file
> >> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
> >>   // Hook up jqModal.
> >> });
> >>
> >> // in another file
> >> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
> >>   // Hook up a different jqModal.
> >> });
> >>
> >> // in another file
> >> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
> >>   // Hook up some scrolling effects and other weirdness.
> >> });
> >>
> >> So my questions to the audience are:
> >>
> >> 1) Is my analysis of the problem correct?
> >>
> >> 2) Is this a reasonable way to go about solving it?
> >>
> >> 3) Is my code sample above somewhat vaguely accurate?
> >>
> >> 4) Any suggestions or gotchas that could save me some hair? :-)
> >>
> >> Many thanks.
> >>
> >> --Larry Garfield
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Delayed ready configuration

[Larry Garfield]

Well, they start by hiding various page elements and then fading them back in, 
sometimes in weird ways.  So I need the hiding part to happen as soon as 
possible so that there's no "flicker of content".  document.ready() hasn't 
caused me any problems in that regard so far when the animations are the only 
thing on the page.  That's what leads me to think that it's a sync issue with 
all the other code that's now running.

--Larry Garfield

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:56:50 -0700, "Erik Beeson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You might try moving your opening animations to $(window).load(function()
> {...});
> 
> --Erik
> 
> 
> On 8/15/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Good  jQuery.
>>
>> I have a site where I have a series of animations that need to run on
>> load.  I also have a large number of other events that happen on load to
>> setup various other effects and animations and modal popups and other
>> goodness.  Individually, I have all of them working (yay!).  However,
> when I
>> put them all together in the page the opening animation is very herky
> jerky
>> (boo!).  I'm assuming that's because the animation happens on ticks, and
>> ticks are delayed by other non-trivial hookup functions that are running
> on
>> $(document).ready().  So I'm having, essentially, thread sync issues
> (yay!).
>>
>> Since none of the other hookup functions really *have* to happen
>> immediately, but could happen after the opening animation (presumably no
> one
>> is going to be clicking on links while parts of the page are still
> fading
>> in), my thinking is to simply have the hookups not fire on
> document.readybut on
>> animation.complete.  They're all residing in different files, however,
> and
>> merging everything into one big script would be a huge hassle as well as
>> much more brittle code.  I also want to keep it modular so that I don't
> have
>> to hard-code every init function into the animation routines.
>>
>> Sooo...
>>
>> My plan at this point is to introduce a new event,
>> document.animationIsDoneSoPageIsReallyReady (or something less silly
>> sounding), and have the other hookups fire on that event instead.  So
> the
>> code would look like:
>>
>> $(document).ready(function() {
>>   // Do animation stuff here.
>>
>>   $(document).trigger('reallydone');
>> });
>>
>> // in another file
>> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>>   // Hook up jqModal.
>> });
>>
>> // in another file
>> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>>   // Hook up a different jqModal.
>> });
>>
>> // in another file
>> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>>   // Hook up some scrolling effects and other weirdness.
>> });
>>
>> So my questions to the audience are:
>>
>> 1) Is my analysis of the problem correct?
>>
>> 2) Is this a reasonable way to go about solving it?
>>
>> 3) Is my code sample above somewhat vaguely accurate?
>>
>> 4) Any suggestions or gotchas that could save me some hair? :-)
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>> --Larry Garfield
>>
>>
> 
> 

[jQuery] Fwd: jQuery and UTF8

[barophobia]

I'm forwarding this email again as it seems that it may not have made
its way to the list the first time.

-- Forwarded message --
From: barophobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:02:52 -0700
Subject: jQuery and UTF8
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com

Hello,

I've got some Japanese text in my MySQL database that shows up
correctly through phpMyAdmin as well as when it is loaded directly as
HTML.

However, when I load it through .load() it only shows up as question marks.

Is there an obvious solution? I couldn't find any good info on jQuery
and UTF8 when searching.

Also, when I try to add Japanese through AJAX it is saved in correctly
in the db (as well as returned) as things like %uD0A4%uC544. It works
fine when I enter foreign languages through a regular form and no
AJAX.



Thanks,
Chris.

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[Mitch]

I news for all of you, none of these suggestions work. Here is my code
you can run it and see. When I add the last click handler it breaks
the 2nd one and nothing happens. My guess is that is still not the
right selector.


http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";>


Untitled Document



$(document).ready(function(){
   /* makes inner div light gray */
   $("#apDiv2").css('background-color','#EE');

   /* makes inner dive dark gray when clicked */
   $('#apDiv2').click(function() {
$("#apDiv2").css('background-color','#66');
   });

   /* this should make inner div light gray when the outer
div apDiv1 is clicked */
   $("div:not(#apDiv2)").click(function() {
 $("#apDiv2").css('background-color','#EE');
   });

/* $("div:not(#apDiv2)")  john
   $("div:not('#apDiv2')") klaus*/

});







How do I...focus and defocus using not



  

[jQuery] Re: Delayed ready configuration

[Erik Beeson]

You might try moving your opening animations to $(window).load(function()
{...});

--Erik


On 8/15/07, Larry Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Good  jQuery.
>
> I have a site where I have a series of animations that need to run on
> load.  I also have a large number of other events that happen on load to
> setup various other effects and animations and modal popups and other
> goodness.  Individually, I have all of them working (yay!).  However, when I
> put them all together in the page the opening animation is very herky jerky
> (boo!).  I'm assuming that's because the animation happens on ticks, and
> ticks are delayed by other non-trivial hookup functions that are running on
> $(document).ready().  So I'm having, essentially, thread sync issues (yay!).
>
> Since none of the other hookup functions really *have* to happen
> immediately, but could happen after the opening animation (presumably no one
> is going to be clicking on links while parts of the page are still fading
> in), my thinking is to simply have the hookups not fire on document.readybut 
> on
> animation.complete.  They're all residing in different files, however, and
> merging everything into one big script would be a huge hassle as well as
> much more brittle code.  I also want to keep it modular so that I don't have
> to hard-code every init function into the animation routines.
>
> Sooo...
>
> My plan at this point is to introduce a new event,
> document.animationIsDoneSoPageIsReallyReady (or something less silly
> sounding), and have the other hookups fire on that event instead.  So the
> code would look like:
>
> $(document).ready(function() {
>   // Do animation stuff here.
>
>   $(document).trigger('reallydone');
> });
>
> // in another file
> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>   // Hook up jqModal.
> });
>
> // in another file
> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>   // Hook up a different jqModal.
> });
>
> // in another file
> $(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
>   // Hook up some scrolling effects and other weirdness.
> });
>
> So my questions to the audience are:
>
> 1) Is my analysis of the problem correct?
>
> 2) Is this a reasonable way to go about solving it?
>
> 3) Is my code sample above somewhat vaguely accurate?
>
> 4) Any suggestions or gotchas that could save me some hair? :-)
>
> Many thanks.
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
>

[jQuery] Delayed ready configuration

[Larry Garfield]

Good  jQuery.

I have a site where I have a series of animations that need to run on load.  I 
also have a large number of other events that happen on load to setup various 
other effects and animations and modal popups and other goodness.  
Individually, I have all of them working (yay!).  However, when I put them all 
together in the page the opening animation is very herky jerky (boo!).  I'm 
assuming that's because the animation happens on ticks, and ticks are delayed 
by other non-trivial hookup functions that are running on $(document).ready().  
So I'm having, essentially, thread sync issues (yay!).

Since none of the other hookup functions really *have* to happen immediately, 
but could happen after the opening animation (presumably no one is going to be 
clicking on links while parts of the page are still fading in), my thinking is 
to simply have the hookups not fire on document.ready but on 
animation.complete.  They're all residing in different files, however, and 
merging everything into one big script would be a huge hassle as well as much 
more brittle code.  I also want to keep it modular so that I don't have to 
hard-code every init function into the animation routines.

Sooo...

My plan at this point is to introduce a new event, 
document.animationIsDoneSoPageIsReallyReady (or something less silly sounding), 
and have the other hookups fire on that event instead.  So the code would look 
like:

$(document).ready(function() {
  // Do animation stuff here.

  $(document).trigger('reallydone');
});

// in another file
$(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
  // Hook up jqModal.
});

// in another file
$(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
  // Hook up a different jqModal.
});

// in another file
$(document).bind('reallydone', function() {
  // Hook up some scrolling effects and other weirdness.
});

So my questions to the audience are:

1) Is my analysis of the problem correct?

2) Is this a reasonable way to go about solving it?

3) Is my code sample above somewhat vaguely accurate?

4) Any suggestions or gotchas that could save me some hair? :-)

Many thanks.

--Larry Garfield

[jQuery] Re: stupid dev tricks: gzipping jQuery without mod_deflate

[Erik Beeson]

I cache the packed versions. Actually, I concatenate all of the scripts that
I need for a page, minify them (used to use packer, now I use YUImin), and
then cache that, all on the fly. So I have one script tag like:



On the first request, I merge the three scripts, minify them, write them out
to a cache file, and store the cache file path with the script names. Next
time I get these same scripts in this order, I serve out the cached version.
This has quite a few benefits: it allows me to have whatever scripts I need
on a given page, it keeps my scripts readable on the server while still
compressing them for the client, and it reduces the number of HTTP requests
necessary to load all of the scripts.

The only real downside is you may lose a little performance from things not
caching as much as they would if they were in separate files, so I don't
serve up jquery.js/interface.js/ext.js this way hoping that the browser will
cache them.

--Erik


On 8/15/07, Ganeshji Marwaha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Very cool... I will start using this technique right away...
>
> But my only concern is, since this technique compresses the file everytime
> it is requested, isn't it an overkill on the server's CPU?
>
> -GTG
>
> On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi, all!
> >
> > i'm working on re-designing the web site for my mother's company,
> > which was horribly neglected/abused by the previous webmaster, and i
> > came across an interesting problem...
> >
> > A part of the refactoring is to use jQuery for parts of the site.
> > However, since all of the pages use the same site layout template
> > (which includes the headers/script tags) yet most of the site won't
> > actually use the JS features, i wanted to make the jQ download as tiny
> > as possible.
> >
> > Unfortunately, i don't have admin rights on my server so i cannot
> > activate mod_gzip/mod_deflate to gzip the stuff on the fly. But here's
> > an easy workaround...
> >
> > Create a PHP file called jquery.php:
> >
> >  >   ob_start( 'ob_gzhandler' );
> >   echo join('',file('jquery-1.1.3.1.pack.js'));
> >   ob_end_flush();
> > ?>
> >
> > Now, in the main site layout template i have:
> >
> > 
> >
> > Firebug confirms that the jQ transfer is then 12k, which is tolerable
> > for my purposes.
> >
> > It would be only a tiny amount of extra work to integrate the PHP port
> > of Dean Edwards' packer, such that the packing is done each time
> > jquery.php is called, but that seems like overkill to me.
> >
> > This approach could just as easily be used to combine all required JS
> > scripts on the fly (just be sure to insert a ';' after each one to
> > accommodate scripts which don't have them), then gzip them, to help
> > reduce the overall download overhead.
> >
> >
>

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[Mike Alsup]

Oops.  Thanks for catching that!  (You too, Karl)


On 8/15/07, Klaus Hartl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mike Alsup wrote:
> > You need to add the '#' for id selection.
> >
> > $("div :not('#myID')");
> >
> > Mike
>
> Mike, I'm not so sure about the white space before the colon,
> theoretically "div :not(#myId)" would select all children of div that do
> not have that particular id?
>
>
> --Klaus
>

[jQuery] Re: Draggables help

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

Gordon,

I just wish u finish this widget in style... I also have similar problems
with interface slider and wasn't able to get around it... Interface slider
also has problems when executing callbacks. For example, when the handle is
dragged and dropped, the onChange fires, but not when you click somewhere on
the slider bar that moves the handle... That was pretty annoying, coz,
onChange events wont work fine in my cases... I sincerely wish u get it
right...

Lemme know if you want my help testing it... I will give my best shot to
break them if u need me to.

Also, remember, there is a jquery UI project taht is going to implement a
slider... But, i am not sure when it is due. Either ways, i think u r in the
right direction...

Also, can u post ur example somewhere where i can take a look...

-GTG

On 8/15/07, Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I realised in the end it's not really a problem because dragging the
> sliders trigger a resizing of the divs used to define the domain so
> the handles still remain grabbable when that part of the object is
> implemented.
>
> http://www.w3.org/
> TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";>
> 
> 
> Untitled Document
> 
> 
> 
> 
> /* Sliders */
> .slider {
> width: 171px;
> height: 58px;
> position: relative;
> margin: 2px;
> padding: 0px;
> overflow: hidden;
> background: url(ui/configurator/range_chart.gif) no-repeat top;
> }
> .slifer .domain {
> position: absolute;
> height: 100%;
> }
> .slider .domain {
> position: absolute;
> top: 0;
> width: 152px;
> height: 100%;
> /*opacity: 0.3;*/
> /*filter: alpha (opacity=30);*/
> }
> .slider .domain.left {
> /*background: yellow;*/
> left: 0px;
> }
> .slider .domain.right {
> /*background: cyan;*/
> right: 0px;
> }
> .slideHandle {
> width: 19px;
> height: 58px;
> position: absolute;
> font-size: 0;
> line-height: 0;
> overflow: hidden;
> border: none;
> top: 0px;
> }
> .leftHandle {
> background: url(ui/configurator/range_handle_left.gif) no-repeat
> bottom;
> }
> .rightHandle {
> left: 133px;
> background: url(ui/configurator/range_handle_right.gif) no-repeat
> bottom;
> }
>
> 
> 
>
> function RangeSlider (slideElem, slideMin, slideMax, fieldMin,
> fieldMax, rangeMin, rangeMax, step)
> {
> var self= this;
> // DOM elements
> self.container  = $(slideElem);
> self.domainLeft = $('.left', self.container);
> self.domainRight= $('.right', self.container);
> self.handleMin  = $(slideMin);
> self.handleMax  = $(slideMax);
>
> // Widths
> self.sliderWidth= self.container.width ();
> self.handleWidth= self.handleMin.width ();
> self.dmnLeftWidth   = self.domainLeft.width ();
> self.dmnRightWidth  = self.domainRight.width ();
>
> self.dmnLeftSize= function ()
> // resize left domain
> {
> // Calculate left domain width
> var newWidth= self.sliderWidth
> - self.dmnRightWidth
> + parseInt (
> self.handleMax.css ('left'));
> // Resize the left hand domain
> self.domainLeft.width (self.dmnLeftWidth=
> newWidth);
> };
> self.dmnRightSize   = function ()
> // Resize right domain
> {
> // Calsulate right domain width and handle offset
> var newWidth= self.sliderWidth
> - self.handleWidth
> - parseInt (
> self.handleMin.css ('left'), 10);
> var widthChange = self.dmnRightWidth - newWidth;
> // Resize the right hand domain
> self.domainRight.width (self.dmnRightWidth  =
> newWidth);
> // Reposition the right drag handle to maintain its
> relative
> position
> self.handleMax.css ('left', parseInt 
> (self.handleMax.css('left'),
> 10) - widthChange);
> };
> self.initHandle = function (handle)
> // Initialize a handle
> {
> handle.Draggable (
> {
> containment : 'parent',
> grid: step,
> onChange: function ()
> {
> switch (this.id)
> {
> case self.handleMin [0].id  :
> self.dmnRightSize ();
> 

[jQuery] Re: [ANNOUNCE] New jQuery Plugins Found

[Rey Bango]

Its on my list of things to do. :)

Rey...

Ganeshji Marwaha wrote:
neat stuff... By any chance are u talking to the authors of the plugins 
to get them to post on our main plugin page?


-GTG

On 8/15/07, *Rey Bango* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 
wrote:



AjaxRain has really been digging up some great plugins which I never
see
announced. Check these out:

jQuery Image Strip
http://blog.joshuaeichorn.com/archives/2007/01/11/jquery-image-strip/

jQuery Share It!
http://www.joanpiedra.com/jquery/shareit/

jQuery Thumbs
http://joanpiedra.com/jquery/thumbs/


jQuery flickrGallery
http://ptflickrgallery.sourceforge.net/web/index.html

[jQuery] Re: jQuery Validation Fails in IE

[Bernd Matzner]

> I was able to work around it by removing the umlauts "ÄÖÜ" from the
> Validate plugin regex. I'm suspecting this happens when the page is
> UTF8-encoded,

Yes, that was the reason.
I found the issue was discussed in the comments section of Jörn's page
http://bassistance.de/jquery-plugins/jquery-plugin-validation/
Jörn suggests to specify the encoding when loading the script:

[jQuery] Re: [ANNOUNCE] New jQuery Plugins Found

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

neat stuff... By any chance are u talking to the authors of the plugins to
get them to post on our main plugin page?

-GTG

On 8/15/07, Rey Bango <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> AjaxRain has really been digging up some great plugins which I never see
> announced. Check these out:
>
> jQuery Image Strip
> http://blog.joshuaeichorn.com/archives/2007/01/11/jquery-image-strip/
>
> jQuery Share It!
> http://www.joanpiedra.com/jquery/shareit/
>
> jQuery Thumbs
> http://joanpiedra.com/jquery/thumbs/
>
> jQuery flickrGallery
> http://ptflickrgallery.sourceforge.net/web/index.html
>

[jQuery] Re: stupid dev tricks: gzipping jQuery without mod_deflate

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

Very cool... I will start using this technique right away...

But my only concern is, since this technique compresses the file everytime
it is requested, isn't it an overkill on the server's CPU?

-GTG

On 8/15/07, Stephan Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi, all!
>
> i'm working on re-designing the web site for my mother's company,
> which was horribly neglected/abused by the previous webmaster, and i
> came across an interesting problem...
>
> A part of the refactoring is to use jQuery for parts of the site.
> However, since all of the pages use the same site layout template
> (which includes the headers/script tags) yet most of the site won't
> actually use the JS features, i wanted to make the jQ download as tiny
> as possible.
>
> Unfortunately, i don't have admin rights on my server so i cannot
> activate mod_gzip/mod_deflate to gzip the stuff on the fly. But here's
> an easy workaround...
>
> Create a PHP file called jquery.php:
>
>ob_start( 'ob_gzhandler' );
>   echo join('',file('jquery-1.1.3.1.pack.js'));
>   ob_end_flush();
> ?>
>
> Now, in the main site layout template i have:
>
> 
>
> Firebug confirms that the jQ transfer is then 12k, which is tolerable
> for my purposes.
>
> It would be only a tiny amount of extra work to integrate the PHP port
> of Dean Edwards' packer, such that the packing is done each time
> jquery.php is called, but that seems like overkill to me.
>
> This approach could just as easily be used to combine all required JS
> scripts on the fly (just be sure to insert a ';' after each one to
> accommodate scripts which don't have them), then gzip them, to help
> reduce the overall download overhead.
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[Karl Swedberg]

On 8/15/07, Mitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Does anyone have a way to select

"all divs except one with a specific ID?"


On Aug 15, 2007, at 3:52 PM, Mike Alsup wrote:


You need to add the '#' for id selection.

$("div :not('#myID')");


And you need to close the space between "div" and ":not"

$("div:not('#myID')");

--Karl
_
Karl Swedberg
www.englishrules.com
www.learningjquery.com



On Aug 15, 2007, at 3:52 PM, Mike Alsup wrote:



You need to add the '#' for id selection.

$("div :not('#myID')");

Mike


On 8/15/07, Mitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Does anyone have a way to select

"all divs except one with a specific ID?"

I want something like

$(* :not("myID")).click

or

$(div :not("myID")).click

I have tried :not but have not been able to get it to work on IDs,
seems that it just works on elements.

thanks

Mitch

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[John Resig]

Yeah, your selector should be:
$("div:not(#myID)")

--John

On 8/15/07, Mitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have a way to select
>
> "all divs except one with a specific ID?"
>
> I want something like
>
> $(* :not("myID")).click
>
> or
>
> $(div :not("myID")).click
>
> I have tried :not but have not been able to get it to work on IDs,
> seems that it just works on elements.
>
> thanks
>
> Mitch
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Tweaks to jCarouselLite

[Ganeshji Marwaha]

Hi Kelvin,

The link that you have posted for the modified version of jCarouselLite and
for the patch is not reachable. The server is timing out i guess.

I would really like to take a look at the changes and the page in which it
wasn't working. This will help me fix the plugin for everyones benefit.

Thanks,
GTG

On 8/15/07, Kelvin Luck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've just tried to implement jCarouselLite [1] on a project I'm working
> on. Nice plugin - perfect for my needs of a lightweight carousel for
> this project :)
>
> But I came across a couple of problems. For some reason, when I set
> circular to false the carousel stopped animating for me. Not sure why as
> it works on the example on the authors site - maybe because my carousel
> had more items in... Or maybe because I have more than one carousel on
> the page...
>
> I also wanted to update the state of the previous and next buttons when
> the plugin initialised and set them to disabled if necessary. So I made
> a couple of changes to the plugin - you can get the changed file here:
>
> http://kelvinluck.com/assets/jquery/jCarouselLite/jquery.jcarousellite.js
>
> And a patch showing the changes here:
>
>
> http://kelvinluck.com/assets/jquery/jCarouselLite/jquery.jcarousellite.js.patch
>
> Hope that's helpful,
>
> Kelvin :)
>
> [1] http://www.gmarwaha.com/jquery/jcarousellite/
>

[jQuery] Re: How to test if plugin X is loaded ?

[Bernd Matzner]

You could also use a try/catch clause

try {
$('#id').tableSorter();
} catch(err) {
// do something else or nothing
}

Bernd

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[Klaus Hartl]

Mike Alsup wrote:

You need to add the '#' for id selection.

$("div :not('#myID')");

Mike


Mike, I'm not so sure about the white space before the colon, 
theoretically "div :not(#myId)" would select all children of div that do 
not have that particular id?



--Klaus

[jQuery] Re: Updated Plugin: jQuery Timers. jQuery-oriented setTimeout/setInterval

[Bernd Matzner]

Hi,

> Google take the *very* strong view of licence prolifiration and warned
> me that if I didn't change back to one of the 8 licences that they
> have listed my project would be thrown off their site.  

Interesting. Doesn't the MIT license, which jQuery itself is licensed
under, provide a max of freedom, except of course for keeping the
license information and a reference to the original author? The latter
seems absolutely appropriate if someone wants to use the author's
work, and the disclaimer would keep any author from legal issues. So,
while the WTFPL is an intruiging approach, wouldn't the MIT license
achieve what you, and Blair have in mind when licensing under WTFPL?

Bernd

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[Mike Alsup]

You need to add the '#' for id selection.

$("div :not('#myID')");

Mike


On 8/15/07, Mitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have a way to select
>
> "all divs except one with a specific ID?"
>
> I want something like
>
> $(* :not("myID")).click
>
> or
>
> $(div :not("myID")).click
>
> I have tried :not but have not been able to get it to work on IDs,
> seems that it just works on elements.
>
> thanks
>
> Mitch
>
>

[jQuery] Re: Selector question should be easy

[Klaus Hartl]

Mitch wrote:

Does anyone have a way to select

"all divs except one with a specific ID?"

I want something like

$(* :not("myID")).click

or

$(div :not("myID")).click

I have tried :not but have not been able to get it to work on IDs,
seems that it just works on elements.

thanks

Mitch





Try

$(div:not('#myID'))


--Klaus

[jQuery] Re: About the author of the recent jQuery article - Please Read

[Mike Alsup]

Indeed.  behavior.js was based on Simon's work and I loved that piece
of code.  It's what I used before jQuery.

Mike

>  From what I remember Simon Willison was the first to come up with a
> documentGetElementsBySelector function... he could be seen as jQuery's
> ancestor :-)

[jQuery] Selector question should be easy

[Mitch]

Does anyone have a way to select

"all divs except one with a specific ID?"

I want something like

$(* :not("myID")).click

or

$(div :not("myID")).click

I have tried :not but have not been able to get it to work on IDs,
seems that it just works on elements.

thanks

Mitch

[jQuery] Re: Updated Plugin: jQuery Timers. jQuery-oriented setTimeout/setInterval

[Jean]

so sad =/
i liked so much that licence lol


On 8/15/07, Tane Piper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I moved my code over to this licence recently but I'm hosted on google code.
>
> Google take the *very* strong view of licence prolifiration and warned
> me that if I didn't change back to one of the 8 licences that they
> have listed my project would be thrown off their site.  So just a
> warning to anyone who would like to use this licence, google code
> won't host you.
>
>
> On 15/08/07, Rey Bango <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Blair,
> >
> > I have to say this was the best part of your plugin's docs:
> >
> > "This plugin is licenced with the WTFPL. In short, do whatever the f**k
> > you want with it."
> >
> > I laughed my butt off on that one. ;)
> >
> > Rey
> >
> > Blair Mitchelmore wrote:
> > > I released this a couple days ago but as was discussed on a previous
> > > thread  > > ea0e4f59bb87cf6e> there were some method naming issues and I also
> > > wanted to add a feature that another setInterval wrapper had. Lucky I
> > > did, because I discovered a preexisting bug which had gone unnoticed
> > > and fixed in the new release. The plugin has been renamed along with
> > > the methods it defines. The url for the source file has been changed
> > > as well to mirror the naming changes. I talked up some of the features
> > > of the plugin in the earlier thread and I've now rewritten the demo
> > > page to explain some of that better so hopefully you enjoy.
> > >
> > > Demo page: 
> > > Source file: 
> > >
> > > -blair
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Tane Piper
> http://digitalspaghetti.me.uk
>
> This email is: [ ] blogable [ x ] ask first [ ] private
>


-- 

[]´s Jean
www.suissa.info

   Ethereal Agency
www.etherealagency.com

[jQuery] Re: About the author of the recent jQuery article - Please Read

[Klaus Hartl]

Tane Piper wrote:

I noticed his site has a LOT of articles going back to 2002 (infact
while looking at the article, I found one about OpenID that really
helped me out).

Fantastic to know we have friends in high places :)


From what I remember Simon Willison was the first to come up with a 
documentGetElementsBySelector function... he could be seen as jQuery's 
ancestor :-)


On the earlier jQuery page John also mentioned him as inspiration, but I 
can't find it anymore.



--Klaus

[jQuery] Re: Interface slider - get value of multiple handles

[Geoffrey Knutzen]

I don't think you can get both values using onSlide(). 
You need to keep track of both values somewhere else and update those values
as you slide. 

It gets tricky when the sliders cross, but you can work through it

-Original Message-
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Simpel
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:42 AM
To: jQuery (English)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [jQuery] Interface slider - get value of multiple handles


Hi there!

so...I've been looking at the interface slider (http://
interface.eyecon.ro/demos/slider.html)

I'd like to use two horizontal sliders but how do I get the current
value for them, the onSlide function only seems to display the value
for the slider that was changed last, I wan't to be able to pull the
values for both handles whilst dragging one of them

/Joel

[jQuery] Re: ORing selectors

[Erik Beeson]

For the record, that's documented here:

http://docs.jquery.com/DOM/Traversing/Selectors#CSS_Selectors

--Erik


On 8/15/07, Erik Beeson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> $('#X,.Y')
>
> --Erik
>
> On 8/15/07, rickdog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > What is the cleanest way for ORing select results, e.g. returning all
> > DIVs with id="X" or class="Y"?
> >
> >
>

[jQuery] Re: ORing selectors

[Klaus Hartl]

Matt Stith wrote:

I would do something like

$("#X").add(".Y");



Just group the selectors:

$('#X, .Y')



--Klaus

[jQuery] Re: ORing selectors

[Erik Beeson]

$('#X,.Y')

--Erik

On 8/15/07, rickdog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> What is the cleanest way for ORing select results, e.g. returning all
> DIVs with id="X" or class="Y"?
>
>

[jQuery] Re: ORing selectors

[Matt Stith]

I would do something like

$("#X").add(".Y");

On 8/15/07, rickdog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> What is the cleanest way for ORing select results, e.g. returning all
> DIVs with id="X" or class="Y"?
>
>

[jQuery] Re: n00b question on $().clone

[Erik Beeson]

Yes, I suggest you have unique IDs. Maybe something like (untested):

..

Then on drop do something like:

var newId = 'sort_list_' + drag.id;
if($('#' + newId).length == 0) { // doesn't exist in this list yet
  $(drag).clone().attr('id', newId).appendTo(this);
}

--Erik


On 8/15/07, jenlindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> hi, how does one check for the presence of a clone? i need to drag
> copies of items from one list to another, then make the second list
> sortable. so, i've been using the revert:true inside the draggable and
> on drop creating a clone of each item - but, i want to prevent cloning
> the same item twice. i want to check to see if an item's clone exists
> before creating one, and only do so if it doesn't. i've been trying
> this kind of thing:
>
> if ( $j('#sort_list').find($j(drag).clone()) ){
> $j(drag).clone().appendTo(this);
> }
>
> but it does not return false. i also tried working with .index == -1,
> but never got that either. do my items need to have unique ids in
> order for this to work?
>
> thanks,
> jen
>
>

[jQuery] Re: jQuery Form Plugin Repository: Compressed versions?

[Josh Nathanson]

Anyone know where to get the compressed version of this plugin:

http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/


I asked that myself recently and got no reply.  I ended up just packing it 
myself.  If you don't have the Dean Edwards packer url, here it is:


http://dean.edwards.name/packer/

-- Josh 

[jQuery] Re: jQuery Form Plugin Repository: Compressed versions?

[Rey Bango]

If its not available, all you need to do is run it through Dean Edward's 
Packer http://dean.edwards.name/packer/


Rey...

Pogo wrote:

Anyone know where to get the compressed version of this plugin:

http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/

???

[jQuery] Re: Do my emails make it to the list?

[Jonathan Sharp]

No, probably not. Your messages are posted, just not immediately. We're
pretty good at moderating posts quickly. Sometimes googlegroups seems a
little lagged.

Cheers,
-js


On 8/15/07, Göran Törnquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Is that the reason why I haven't had any responses to my post (and
> repost) about problems with 3D Carousel?
>
>
> /Göran
>
>
>
> The reason there's a delay is that new members posts are moderated to
> fight spam. After x number of "valid" posts the moderation restriction is
> removed. I've removed this restriction for your account.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> -js
>
>
>
> On 8/15/07,* barophobia* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I can see my emails in the Gmail interface but it doesn't seem that
> they're actually making it to everyone else.
>
> Please respond (off list).
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Chris.
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* , and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -
> Göran Törnquist
> Stockby Hantverksby 4
> 181 75 Lidingö
>
> 0733-86 04 70
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* , and is
> believed to be clean.

[jQuery] Re: Interface Drag/Drop Animation

[Erik Beeson]

This just came up a week ago, too. Here's the previous thread that offers a
few solutions:

http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/44bb914d6c8718d2

--Erik


On 8/15/07, Collin Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Quick question about the Interface Drag+Drop methods:  When I use
> {revert:true,fx:300} to make the draggable fly back to the starting
> point, is there a way to cancel that animation of the draggable is
> successfully placed on a droppable?  By default it accepts and still
> runs the "revert" animation, but I want the draggable to "stick" to
> the droppable and only revert if the user drops outside of a droppable
> area.  Is this possible?
>
> Thanks!
>
>

[jQuery] Do my emails make it to the list?

[Göran Törnquist]

Is that the reason why I haven't had any 
responses to my post (and repost) about problems 
with 3D Carousel?

/Göran

>The reason there's a delay is that new members 
>posts are moderated to fight spam. After x 
>number of "valid" posts the moderation 
>restriction is removed. I've removed this 
>restriction for your account.
>
>Cheers,
>-js
>
>
>On 8/15/07, barophobia 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>wrote:
>
>
>I can see my emails in the Gmail interface but it doesn't seem that
>they're actually making it to everyone else.
>
>Please respond (off list).
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>Chris.
>
>
>
>--
>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>believed to be clean.


--
-
Göran Törnquist
Stockby Hantverksby 4
181 75 Lidingö

0733-86 04 70
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

[jQuery] ORing selectors

[rickdog]

What is the cleanest way for ORing select results, e.g. returning all
DIVs with id="X" or class="Y"?

[jQuery] n00b question on $().clone

[jenlindner]

hi, how does one check for the presence of a clone? i need to drag
copies of items from one list to another, then make the second list
sortable. so, i've been using the revert:true inside the draggable and
on drop creating a clone of each item - but, i want to prevent cloning
the same item twice. i want to check to see if an item's clone exists
before creating one, and only do so if it doesn't. i've been trying
this kind of thing:

if ( $j('#sort_list').find($j(drag).clone()) ){
$j(drag).clone().appendTo(this);
}

but it does not return false. i also tried working with .index == -1,
but never got that either. do my items need to have unique ids in
order for this to work?

thanks,
jen

[jQuery] Re: Scrolling a div area without scrolling the page?

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Hi,

Thank you for your reply -- this solution presents itself exactly what
I was looking for.

Can't wait to use the jquery plug-in version -- do you have any idea
when you might have that available?

Matthew

On Aug 14, 2:48 am, Kelvin Luck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You can do this if you are using my jScrollPane and it's scrollTo method:
>
> http://kelvinluck.com/assets/jquery/jScrollPane/scrollTo.html
>
> I'm just about to make an improvement which will allow you to pass in a
> jQuery selector for the object you want to scroll to as well as a pixel
> position - keep an eye on the following ticket to know when it's been added:
>
> http://jquery.com/plugins/node/348
>
> Hope that helps,
>
> Kelvin :)
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > I don't know if jquery will be able to address this but I thought I
> > would try anyway.
>
> > Is there a way to scroll a div area (which has an overflow:auto) to an
> > anchor point within the div without scrolling the page (i.e., the page
> > should remain stationary)?  In other words, is there a way to use
> > jquery to animate the div when an anchor tag is clicked?
>
> > I've coded a basic html example 
> > athttp://matthewmoore.info/jquery/example.html.
> > You'll see the page scroll when you click on a letter at the top of
> > the div.
>
> > Any ideas?
>
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Matthew

[jQuery] Interface Drag/Drop Animation

[Collin Allen]

Quick question about the Interface Drag+Drop methods:  When I use
{revert:true,fx:300} to make the draggable fly back to the starting
point, is there a way to cancel that animation of the draggable is
successfully placed on a droppable?  By default it accepts and still
runs the "revert" animation, but I want the draggable to "stick" to
the droppable and only revert if the user drops outside of a droppable
area.  Is this possible?

Thanks!

[jQuery] Re: display "Please wait" while waiting for a database query.

[seedy]

there is a great plugin that will do this for you called blockUI
http://www.malsup.com/jquery/block/


VS YR wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have a php web application and sometimes the database query will
> take a while to process results.  Using JQuery, is it possible to
> display a "Please wait" message and then clear it when the
> database query completes ( the code comes out of an foreach
> condition ).
> 
> Please let me know..
> 
> Thank you.
> -VS.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-display-%22Please-wait%22-while-waiting-for-a-database-query.-tf4272597s15494.html#a12165622
Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

[jQuery] Re: Issue with .ajax incrementally submitting.

[deepreel]

This is the best i can do without some machinations. Please ignore the
obviousness to my only recent introduction to DOM/AJAX etc.

!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://
www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">






jSON test


td.ditem{
background: tan;
font-style: bold;

}
td.dvalue{
background: wheat;
}

a.selectedrecord{
background: red;
}
a.unselectedrecord{
margin:2;
background: #FAFAD2;
border: thin solid;
}




var clickLock=false;
$(document).ready(function(){

// CSS Setups
$("dl.actionMenu").hide();

$("#action").hide();


// Event Handling
// Mouse Overs
$('body').mouseover(function(event) {
if ($(event.target).is("a.record")) {
$(event.target).toggleClass("selectedrecord");
entryDetail(event.target.id);

}

});
//MouseOuts
$('body').mouseout(function(event) {
if ($(event.target).is("a.record")) {
$(event.target).toggleClass("selectedrecord");


}

});
//OnChanges
// Quick Search Select
$('body').change(function(event){
if($(event.target).is("select#qsmode")){
$('#quicksearchform').ajaxSubmit({
dataType: 'json',
success: displayResults,
target: '#resultstable',
timeout: 5000
});


}
});

// OnClicks
// Action Menu Clicks

$("a#profile").click(function(){
if(!clickLock){
clickLock=true;
$("dl.actionMenu").hide();

var selected = $("tr#aa-gwprofile > td.dvalue");
var smode="profile";
var changearea = "";
var button = ' OR