Somewhat related, there's a small but harmless typo at
http://dev.jquery.com/browser/trunk/jquery/src/core.js#L479
Is that supposed to be "return this.slice( i, i + 1 )" ?
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:07 AM, David Zhou wrote:
> It looks like a bug in Sizzle -- specifically, when applying filters,
It looks like a bug in Sizzle -- specifically, when applying filters,
it's applying to the two tables separately.
See:
http://media.nodnod.net/eq.html
Note that $('table tr:eq(36)') gives none while $('table tr:eq(5)')
gives 2. One for each table.
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:31 AM, John Resig
Okay, I get what you're saying. But I don't understand why you think
jQuery needs to modify its code significantly.
Right now, as per John, jQuery does:
if supports_standards:
use_standards
else:
use alt_method
The only change that needs to happen to support your point is to
replace th
On Jan 14, 10:52 pm, "David Zhou" wrote:
> Can you elaborate on these concepts?
Simple. Don't make the assumption that if the standard approach
doesn't work, then a specific fix will. That's almost as bad as saying
"if the user agent string says X, then method Y must be available."
If the stand
Hmm - yep - definitely looks like an issue here, will check in to it, thanks!
--John
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 9:27 PM, jquery.redsqu...@googlemail.com
wrote:
>
> I think there is an issue with :eq().
>
> Demo test case http://jsbin.com/omobe
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~--
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 11:39 PM, Matt wrote:
>
> On Jan 14, 3:11 pm, "David Zhou" wrote:
>> A new browser to be support would be enough to warrant a new version
>> of jQuery, I think.
>
> Which would be entirely unnecessary if feature detection is done
> correctly and the new browser doesn't ha
On Jan 14, 3:11 pm, "David Zhou" wrote:
> A new browser to be support would be enough to warrant a new version
> of jQuery, I think.
Which would be entirely unnecessary if feature detection is done
correctly and the new browser doesn't have any bugs to account for.
> In terms of logic, I thin
I think there is an issue with :eq().
Demo test case http://jsbin.com/omobe
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.co
Seemed to work fine when I checked, the fx duration was short. I
retried with 5000 and the problem became clear.
Fixed at: http://dev.jquery.com/changeset/6116
Wasn't necessary but as I stopped relying on (and null'ing)
jQuery.timerId, I simply made it a local var.
Cheers
--
Ariel Flesler
http
Oops, I meant
$(this).parents().andSelf().nextAll('b:first');
Slightly different :) And yeah, that gets quite slow on a large DOM,
in the 100ms range for thousands of elements.
cheers,
- ricardo
On Jan 14, 8:09 pm, Leeoniya wrote:
> i dont believe it will, next and nextAll only work on siblin
i dont believe it will, next and nextAll only work on siblings. in my
example, they arent.
On Jan 14, 3:27 pm, Ricardo Tomasi wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2:11 pm, Leeoniya wrote:
>
> > nextest() that works outside the bounds of the parent container? for
> > example:
>
> >
> > bar
> >
> >
> > Hel
On Jan 14, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> My guess is that you made this change on your machine, and tested it
> using "text/html" as the mime type. If so, you needn't have made any
> change at all, the key is difference is the mime type which causes
> browsers to trigger XHTML mode.
>
> $ cu
http://wollibolli.com/jquery-test/
On Jan 14, 10:42 pm, John Resig wrote:
> Do you have an example page where this occurs?
>
> --John
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Nesto wrote:
>
> > I tried using the timeout option on $.ajax and it just didn't seem to
> > work.
>
> > I think I tracked i
Karl Swedberg wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> You're using the HTML 5 doctype with the xmlns attribute in the
> tag. Is that intentional?
Yes.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";>
>
> If you either remove the xmlns attribute ...
>
>
>
>
> ... or use the xhtml dtd ...
>
> "http:/
Do you have an example page where this occurs?
--John
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Nesto wrote:
>
> I tried using the timeout option on $.ajax and it just didn't seem to
> work.
>
> I think I tracked it down, since xhr gets set to null in
> onreadystatechange( "timeout" );,
>
> if ( xhr )
I tried using the timeout option on $.ajax and it just didn't seem to
work.
I think I tracked it down, since xhr gets set to null in
onreadystatechange( "timeout" );,
if ( xhr ) xhr.abort(); never runs and therefor the ajax call never
gets cancelled. Is this a bug or is it how it is meant to wor
Hi Sam,
You're using the HTML 5 doctype with the xmlns attribute in the
tag. Is that intentional?
>
> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";>
If you either remove the xmlns attribute ...
... or use the xhtml dtd ...
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
http://www.w3.org/1999/xht
This seems to work for me:
http://media.nodnod.net/val_set.html
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:27 PM, John Resig wrote:
>
> Do you have a test page demonstrating the issue? It would help us to
> diagnose the problem.
>
> --John
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM, matt wrote:
>>
>> I cant seem
filed anyhow, you should pluck it from the release zip until it's
fixed, or not.
http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/3852
On Jan 14, 3:31 pm, John Resig wrote:
> Yeah, we don't provide a packed version anymore - we only recommend
> that the minified version be used (it downloads and runs faster than a
Yeah, we don't provide a packed version anymore - we only recommend
that the minified version be used (it downloads and runs faster than a
packed script).
--John
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Leeoniya wrote:
>
> yes, i used the packed version from the release zip, which appears to
> be the
On Jan 14, 2:11 pm, Leeoniya wrote:
> nextest() that works outside the bounds of the parent container? for
> example:
>
>
> bar
>
>
> Hello!
>
>
> $("#foo").nextest("b") would return the second node in the tree
> following the current element, but not a sibling. right now i'm
> needing
yes, i used the packed version from the release zip, which appears to
be the only variant that does this.
does Dean have a bug tracker?
On Jan 14, 3:18 pm, "David Zhou" wrote:
> This works for me:
>
> http://media.nodnod.net/val.html
>
> To ensure a known state, I downloaded the min version fro
Do you have a test page demonstrating the issue? It would help us to
diagnose the problem.
--John
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM, matt wrote:
>
> I cant seem to set the value of any select elements using val. Input
> type=text is working fine.
>
> So I have something like:
>$('#usa_r
Test case:
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2009/01/14/test12.html
http://intertwingly.net/stories/2009/01/14/test13.html
- Sam Ruby
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To po
I cant seem to set the value of any select elements using val. Input
type=text is working fine.
So I have something like:
$('#usa_reference_state_id').val("2")
alert($('#usa_reference_state_id').val() )
and the alert is "" so no value was set. I am 100% sure that 2 is in
the list
Ariel -
> http://docs.jquery.com/Release:jQuery_1.3#Effects
>
> Animations with no duration now behave differently than in 1.2.6.
> That's why, it's not a regression, it's a feature.
It definitely looks like there's something else going on here, though.
Just because the animation happens instant
This works for me:
http://media.nodnod.net/val.html
To ensure a known state, I downloaded the min version from:
http://code.google.com/p/jqueryjs/
Are you using the right version of jquery?
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:15 PM, John Resig wrote:
>
> Can you file a bug in the bug tracker? Thanks.
Can you file a bug in the bug tracker? Thanks.
http://dev.jquery.com/
--John
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Leeoniya wrote:
>
> this is a definitely a show stopper for me. just tested in ie7,
> chrome, FF nightly, opera. : (
>
>
> On Jan 14, 2:54 pm, Leeoniya wrote:
>> .val() now returns u
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Matt wrote:
>> If any of our jQuery.support
>> tests had three possible solutions then we would certainly opt for
>> that instead (but, as it turns out, all the things that we test for
>> only fail in a single browser, yielding only one correct alternative
>> sol
this is a definitely a show stopper for me. just tested in ie7,
chrome, FF nightly, opera. : (
On Jan 14, 2:54 pm, Leeoniya wrote:
> .val() now returns undefined if elements contain a "value"
> attribute, otherwise val() returns text() of the :selected option.
>
> both actually seem incorrect
On Jan 14, 12:37 pm, John Resig wrote:
> Why would we test for non-standard behavior first? This would mean
> that a browser that implements both a standard and non-standard
> behavior would see a non-standard preference - which seems quite
> wrong.
Agreed.
> As to the logic structure that we u
http://docs.jquery.com/Release:jQuery_1.3#Effects
Animations with no duration now behave differently than in 1.2.6.
That's why, it's not a regression, it's a feature.
--
Ariel Flesler
http://flesler.blogspot.com
On Jan 14, 5:02 pm, MarionNewlevant
wrote:
> http://newlevant.com/marion/jqueryplu
.val() now returns undefined if elements contain a "value"
attribute, otherwise val() returns text() of the :selected option.
both actually seem incorrect to me but only the first behavior seems
like a blocker regress. i first noticed that it was strange that the
"single select" example for val(
http://newlevant.com/marion/jqueryplugins/animationBug/
Keep me posted. I'd love to understand what's going on here.
On Jan 14, 3:46 am, Ariel Flesler wrote:
> Can you put this up online so we can debug ?
>
> --
> Ariel Fleslerhttp://flesler.blogspot.com
>
> On Jan 14, 6:02 am, MarionNewlevant
> For example, opacity. The "support" check is whether style.opacity
> works correctly, but if it doesn't then it is _assumed_ that using
> alpha is the fix. This is the wrong logic. Instead, you should check
> specifically for whether alpha is required. A browser may exist (in
> theory) that does
On Jan 14, 8:45 am, John Resig wrote:
> jQuery 1.3 is out!
Fantastic! There is definite improvement here. Now I just need to do a
bunch of testing to work it into some existing apps and benefit from
the performance increases.
One of the common criticisms of jQuery has been the browser sniffing,
1. you're using an old version of jQuery (1.2.3). The currently
released is 1.2.6, 1.3 almost ready to go
2. you're loading jQuery at the end of the tag, so there's no
point in using $(document).ready()
3. I'm not getting the error you mentioned on Internet Explorer
4. this question is better
congrats
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:45 PM, John Resig wrote:
>
> Hey Everyone -
>
> jQuery 1.3 is out! Full details here:
> http://blog.jquery.com/2009/01/14/jquery-13-and-the-jquery-foundation/
>
> Happy 3rd Birthday, jQuery!
>
> --John
>
> >
>
--
Regards
Wael Orabi
--~--~-~--~~
Great job ! Congrats !
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Leeoniya wrote:
>
> Epic win! and awesomest news ever!
> good move on joining the Software Freedom Conservancy, too.
>
> cheers,
> Leon
>
>
> On Jan 14, 8:45 am, John Resig wrote:
>> Hey Everyone -
>>
>> jQuery 1.3 is out! Full details
>>
slight addition/correction to above:
$(this).ancests(":eq(0)"); // parent
$(this).ancests("li:eq(0)");// filtered parent
also if .and() is used to retain self, as i put above, ancest() isnt
necessarily accurate wording since if it can select itself then it
really isnt its own anc
ah, i didnt know parents() worked that way, i thought it was just a
(.parentNode & .is()) loop rather than a full DOM parentNode loop
followed by a filtering the resultset.
I should say i feel .parents() should have probably been ancests(), i
always found the parent/parents method pair kinda misl
The major reason is that while the functionality is equivalent -
closest is significantly faster (since it's able to process each
element one element at a time rather than finding all elements then
filtering).
This was discussed in the Delegation Filtering Performance part of the release:
http://
John,
closest() which i feel should have been first-ancest-or-self() is
nearly functionally identical to parents("li:eq(0)").andSelf
()except andSelf would need to prepend to the collection rather
than append, since position matters.
was there a reason for creating a near-identical method? se
IIRC, according to the dom specs, blur is only called when an element
loses focus via pointer, blur() or tabbing.
In the strictest sense, when triggering a focus explicitly, you'll
also need to explicitly call blur if you want a blur event to happen.
On the on the other hand, I would agree that
well, if the function will require a predefined scope, then it's kind
of pointless to create a new method for something that can easily be
done by pre-speccing the context in a single selector ahead of time
eg: .parents(":eq(3)"), you would still need to use index(), but
essentially all you'd be d
Well, my guess is that you're testing it in Firefox - it works there
but doesn't work in IE. We're going to be adding in IE support for
change very soon in an upcoming 1.3.x update.
--John
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 11:22 AM, James Hughes wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sorry of this comes across as a sil
Hello,
Sorry of this comes across as a silly question but I was wonder which is the
better approach (or are they essentially the same thing?). Description - A div
called skill-list houses hundreds of drop downs with the class
skill-level-selector. When one of these selcts are changed an ajax
you should now be able to use .closest(), although i agree, the naming
should have been firstancest or something. closest sounds too much
like a sibling traversal.
i currently constructs like .parents("li:eq(0)") all over the place,
pretty much identical to Karl's sugg. i think i'll be switching
> i've been using chains like this all over my webapp:
>
> $(this).parents("li:eq(0)")
>
> it seems that closest is a direct replacement for this and a
> functional equiv of
>
> $(this).closest("li").
It's almost equivalent to that. There's the possibility that if 'this'
is an li element that it
i've been using chains like this all over my webapp:
$(this).parents("li:eq(0)")
it seems that closest is a direct replacement for this and a
functional equiv of
$(this).closest("li").
also, is there anything like
nextest() that works outside the bounds of the parent container? for
example:
I've only just noticed this, but the jQuery focus() method doesn't cause
a blur event to trigger on the previously focused element.
The code below demonstrates.
You need to focus a list item by clicking on it and then using the
up/down arrows to move the focus.
The actual focus is moved as shown b
No response about that ? Is it so dumby :P ?
On 16 déc 2008, 16:34, Just wrote:
> Hi Ricardo !
> Thanks to answering :).
>
> Yea should be "first-ancestor" so.
>
> On 16 déc, 13:43, Ricardo Tomasi wrote:
>
> > If you'll allow me, I believe what Just suggested should indeed be
> > possible with
Very nice, Thank You!
-- Elijah
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Leeoniya wrote:
>
> Epic win! and awesomest news ever!
> good move on joining the Software Freedom Conservancy, too.
>
> cheers,
> Leon
>
>
> On Jan 14, 8:45 am, John Resig wrote:
> > Hey Everyone -
> >
> > jQuery 1.3 is out! Fu
Epic win! and awesomest news ever!
good move on joining the Software Freedom Conservancy, too.
cheers,
Leon
On Jan 14, 8:45 am, John Resig wrote:
> Hey Everyone -
>
> jQuery 1.3 is out! Full details
> here:http://blog.jquery.com/2009/01/14/jquery-13-and-the-jquery-foundation/
>
> Happy 3rd Bi
My favorite framework had a birthday and grew a little bit more to celebrate
it. Congrats to you John (and crew)! As I did for Google, I will continue to
do what I can elsewhere to bring the light of jQuery to other companies
and businesses.
Congrats again!
Sincerely,
Gabriel Harrison
On Wed,
Congrats!
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Briz wrote:
> Way to go John and team. Thanks for your hard work on the library and your
> continuing guidance of the community.
> _
> Brad Brizendine
> CTO, Glyphix http://www.glyphix.com/
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009
Way to go John and team. Thanks for your hard work on the library and your
continuing guidance of the community.
_
Brad Brizendine
CTO, Glyphix http://www.glyphix.com/
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:45 AM, John Resig wrote:
>
> Hey Everyone -
>
> jQuery 1.3 is out
John,
you and all the jQuery team members are always at the top of
innovation.
It is not easy for a framework like jQuery and with its audience to
continuously add new features and improvements without breaking
previous code base. But you just can do it so well !!! :-)
My sincere compliments for
Congratulations John and contributors!
I'm having a champagne latte here to celebrate... :-)
-zs
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:45 AM, John Resig wrote:
>
> Hey Everyone -
>
> jQuery 1.3 is out! Full details here:
> http://blog.jquery.com/2009/01/14/jquery-13-and-the-jquery-foundation/
>
> Happy
Hey Everyone -
jQuery 1.3 is out! Full details here:
http://blog.jquery.com/2009/01/14/jquery-13-and-the-jquery-foundation/
Happy 3rd Birthday, jQuery!
--John
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuer
@Ariel: your plugin looks great. I really look forward to the
release.
On 14 Jan., 12:56, Ariel Flesler wrote:
> The delay part would be easy to achieve with this soon to be released
> plugin:
> http://test.flesler.com/jquery.sugar/
>
> $('div').slideUp().
> .then().wait(1000)
>
I saw this thread a half hour ago or so and decided to take a poke at
it. Took me a while to find the querySelectorAll bit because I'm a
newbie here and don't know the codebase.
Anyway, it looks like when we are in quirks mode, Safari is case-
insensitive in querySelectorAll, but strict abou
The delay part would be easy to achieve with this soon to be released
plugin:
http://test.flesler.com/jquery.sugar/
$('div').slideUp().
.then().wait(1000)
.then().slideDown();
--
Ariel Flesler
http://flesler.blogspot.com
On Jan 12, 10:19 am, blinds wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Th
Can you put this up online so we can debug ?
--
Ariel Flesler
http://flesler.blogspot.com
On Jan 14, 6:02 am, MarionNewlevant
wrote:
> 1.3rc2: animate with duration of 0 and callback << bug
>
> Something goes wrong in jQuery-1.3rc2.js with animate when duration is
> 0, and there is a callback.
Please include the DOCTYPE advice in the release notes. It seems like
Safari's querySelectorAll behaves very oddly when the doctype is
missing.
Jörn
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:39 AM, John Resig wrote:
>
> Something finally struck me about what you said (sorry, it's late
> here) - it fails only i
1.3rc2: animate with duration of 0 and callback << bug
Something goes wrong in jQuery-1.3rc2.js with animate when duration is
0, and there is a callback. Is 0 an illegal duration? If not, there's
some bug in the jQuery code.
code:
$(document).ready(function(){
doFades([
{f: '#c0', s: 0},
66 matches
Mail list logo
