Sounds kind of nice to me. Do you have some other examples? I wonder
how it would be expected to interact with other features:
$("p").bind("click.myplug keydown[keyCode=119].myplug", function ...
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are sub
I brought this up a while back and I think it was well-received. I'd like to
get some feedback on this proposal again before putting any work into it.
The basic idea is:
$("p").bind("keydown[keyCode=119]", function() {})
It's basically a shortcut for:
$("p").bind("keydown", function(e) { if(e.ke
We had something like that and it was that very scenario which exposed
the bug I'm trying to address: Another GWT application depended only
on the "tuna" GWT module and said "tuna" module did not have a
dependency on jQuery until recently. An upgrade of the "tuna" module
(to the jQuery-dependent
Why can't you just always load jQuery beforehand, then neither of the
libraries should need to load jQuery. Something requiring jQuery
shouldn't imply that it loads it, rather it would be better if jQuery
was loaded separately on it's own.
Even if you make jQuery safe to include more than once
> var foo = $('#foo').clone(true);
> $('#foo').remove();
> foo.appendTo('somewhere else later')
Kludgy, inefficient, and ineffective (if there are references to the
original element elsewhere).
However, I guess another way around would be to use a storage node/
fragment and append the removed el
I had a related idea[1] about speeding up DOM removal operations, but
this post got me thinking: would it be possible to use setTimeout to
delay event and data removal altogether?
function kill() {
jQuery.event.remove( this );
jQuery.removeData( this );
};
$.fn.remove = function( selector )
This seems like a possible work-around:
var foo = $('#foo').clone(true);
$('#foo').remove();
foo.appendTo('somewhere else later')
Not removing the handlers and data would consume more memory I guess,
there is no way to guess if it's gonna be reappended or not.
On Jan 29, 7:54 am, Már Örlygsson
you know I feel like a total idiot. I searched and searched about
special characters and stuff and never stopped to think twice.
but the other thing is why would I get a syntax error when using the
"^" on some pages?
regardless of one or two classes it shouldn't error out.
Thanks.
Roy
On Jan 2
you know I feel like a total idiot. I searched and searched about
special characters and stuff and never stopped to think twice.
Thanks.
Roy
On Jan 29, 4:51 pm, David Zhou wrote:
> Er.. a class with a space is two separate classes.
>
> -- dz
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM, rhasson wrote:
I run this command $("^.WasPrice") which suppose to find the class
that starts with WasPrice. The actual class name is "WasPrice
PriceM". My issue is being to select a class with a space. I can't
figure out how to escape a space character to select such classes. So
I decided to use the "^" whi
Er.. a class with a space is two separate classes.
-- dz
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM, rhasson wrote:
>
> I run this command $("^.WasPrice") which suppose to find the class
> that starts with WasPrice. The actual class name is "WasPrice
> PriceM". My issue is being to select a class with
Daniel,
this is how I see these attributes on form elements:
"enabled"
the functionalities of the form element are available and interactions
by users are allowed
"disabled"
the functionalities of the form element are available and interactions
by users are disallowed
"hidden"
the form element
Hi,
We're using jQuery with GWT and, long story short, here's what happens:
A third-party GWT module (let's call it "chicken") includes jQuery and
makes some additions to the jQuery object. Along comes another GWT
module (let's call it "tuna") that also includes jQuery and, without
the ability t
Ricardo and John,
I've just looked at the ticket and the patch and it seems to be an
effective solution. I hope this will be fixed in 1.3.2. :-) Many
thanks for your help!
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 20:22, John Resig wrote:
>
> Thanks for the ticket and the patch - I'll check into it ASAP.
--~--~
Looking at the Sizzle code:
filters: {
enabled: function(elem){
return elem.disabled === false && elem.type !== "hidden";
},
disabled: function(elem){
return elem.disabled === true;
},
This honestly doesn't make sense. :not(:enabled) != :disabled and
:enabled != :
John,
while debugging those two .live() on few elements on my machine I have
come across another problem.
It seems that every element touched by the selector is adding a
"doneXXX" property to each parent on each iteration of the selector.
So with "mouseover/mouseout" I finished up with something
In a normal form POST, a form element with will
send those hidden elements as request variables alongside visible
enabled variables.
In jQuery 1.3.1, filtering on $(":enabled", myForm) will only find
VISIBLE enabled elements, which is changed since jQuery 1.2.6. I don't
believe this change is co
Is there any update on this bug or a workaround? I'm trying to clone
(true) the body - it works fine in firefox and chrome but IE gives me
"'nodeType' is null or not an object"
On Dec 1 2008, 1:05 pm, Eric Martin wrote:
> Is this related?
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev/browse_thre
I had a similar issue with my own personal framework. I ended up
creating a separate .extract() method for the purpose of removing a node
from the document but keeping it floating around in that object so you
could latter appendTo another node.
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http:
> I mean this is something I set up on my machine to do some test
> locally and I have no slow down problems and the hover works perfectly
> even if I exaggerate with the UL / LI / A and their nesting.
It sounds like it's likely a problem with some other piece of code on
their site, then. It woul
John,
I have no access to all the code, at least not yet, some part of it is
also packed and minified and not part of jQuery. So there may be
something wrong there. They don't make great use of jQuery that's for
sure, they where trying to spice up a bit the ugly interface they had.
The problem is
Also, I forgot, I'm declaring .ajaxSetup variables:
$.ajaxSetup({async:false,cache:false});
On Jan 29, 9:39 am, Greg Schoen wrote:
> I have a feeling that it might have something to do with the previous
> GET request that I'm calling, but this is more or less the functions
> that I'm calling. I
Could you put an example up? That would certainly help to debug the
problem (I suspect that this problem is largely markup dependent).
--John
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Diego Perini wrote:
>
> I have just gone through a problem in code that seems related to live
> ().
>
> A coworker has
I have just gone through a problem in code that seems related to live
().
A coworker has just shifted from bind() to live() in a page where many
UL / LI / A (probably a hundred of them).
The anchors are just internal page jumps, there are counters for each
click on them. The user have to follow
I have a feeling that it might have something to do with the previous
GET request that I'm calling, but this is more or less the functions
that I'm calling. I removed some of the unneeded code to make it more
manageable:
var download = {start:'',end:'',time:'',line:'',kbps:'',diff:''};
Hmm - do you have a test case that we can look at? I'd imagine that
Opera is triggering some ready state too early, or some such.
--John
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Greg Schoen wrote:
>
> I'm having an issue with .ajax and .post and their callbacks. I have
> the following function:
>
> $
What would you want from the complete callback? Just the fact that it
is able to handle 'notmodified' responses?
--John
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 5:55 AM, wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> jQuery.fn.load lets the complete function be called. jQuery.get lets the
> function success be called. Why does jQuery.
Hi,
jQuery.fn.load lets the complete function be called. jQuery.get lets the
function success be called. Why does jQuery.fn.load not the same as jQuery.get?
Thanks.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
I'm having an issue with .ajax and .post and their callbacks. I have
the following function:
$.post("upload.php", {file:testdata}, function() {
$("#results").html("done!");
});
testdata is a 128k string that gets posted to the server, however, in
IE and in Opera, the success/callback is trigger
thanks very much for your replies.
I did look into using JSON initially but got carried away and knocked
out a horrible twisted hack that could potentially immediately make
available all my web services as plugins or gadgets or widgets or ...
I dont know what to call them actually!
However think
`$("#foo").remove()` removes all event handlers and stored data.
But, sometimes I'd like to temporarily remove an element from the DOM
for later reinjection, in which case the event and data removal
becomes a nuisance.
Is there a way to do that in jQuery - aside from writing your own
`.removeTem
31 matches
Mail list logo
