On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:57:50 -0800, John Resig jere...@gmail.com wrote:
The 'jump' Kazzie mentioned is clearly visible at the slideToggle page
at the docs, using IE7:
http://docs.jquery.com/Effects/slideToggle#demo
Correct, we already have that test case - I was asking Janis if there
was
Hi,
Regardless of whether or not there is a bug in jQuery related to this I
will look into changing jScrollPane to use this.scrollHeight if that is
reliable cross browser...
I'll let other people decide if it is an issue with jQuery or if I am
using outerHeight incorrectly,
Thanks for
I just started using jQuery and am having trouble getting the fade
speed to work. It seems to always fade fast even if I set it to 'slow'
or '9'. I have reprod in IE, Firefox, and Chrome. I am using
jQuery v1.3.1 just downloaded today. Any ideas?
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML
If you put in a number, don't put it in a string - just leave it as a number.
.fadeOut(2000)
--John
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 2:00 AM, matanich matani...@gmail.com wrote:
I just started using jQuery and am having trouble getting the fade
speed to work. It seems to always fade fast even if I
That appears to be a separate issue - it looks like the height
calculation may be off. Try setting a fixed width on the things that
you are animating the height off - that'll frequently help.
--John
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Kelvin Luck kel...@kelvinluck.com wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan
I've set up a test page and no possible combination that I try works:
http://dev.jquery.com/~john/ticket/xmlns/
Including the basic one:
var div = document.createElement(div);
div.innerHTML = 'b lift:gc=fooHi/b';
It sounds like there's another issue at play.
--John
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at
In that link, I see the alert from catch in Firefox 3 with the same
failure code that David mentioned earlier.
Well, the difference should be that the error isn't coming from jQuery
- this is purely a DOM/Firefox weird interaction here. It looks like
its rejecting the namespace - and because
Could you create a test case for us to review?
--
Brandon Aaron
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:43 PM, ebetancourt ebe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I was working with Kelvin Luck's great jScrollPane library, and
found that it would stop rendering the scrollbars if I set a max-
height property in the
http://media.nodnod.net/test.html works for me. Is it because I'm not
serving the page as application/xhtml+xml?
-- dz
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Dave Methvin dave.meth...@gmail.com wrote:
Me too.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.6) Gecko/
2009011913
We have a few places in jQuery UI where we need to prevent events from
occurring, e.g., preventing the click event after a drag. We've been
partially successful by just binding a handler and the click event and
returning false. This can be improved by calling
event.stopImmediatePropagation(),
Correct - you have to do it with the mimetype - which forces it in to
the XML mode where everything becomes 'fun'.
--John
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:37 AM, David Zhou da...@nodnod.net wrote:
http://media.nodnod.net/test.html works for me. Is it because I'm not
serving the page as
I've found that I enjoy looking at bugs and trying to replicate them
and adding detail to the ticket to help the actual bug fixer with the
issue when they can get around to fixing it.
Take for example this ticket: http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/4081
I was able to recreate the bug and added
Actually, it might be attributable to an old jquery library? The site
we are working on has jquery 1.2.6 (just noticed, sorry).
All of the browsers return the defined height or max-height as inner /
outer height, none are returning the equivalent of the scrollHeight (I
am not sure if this was
That fixed it - thanks John :)
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:58:34 -0800, John Resig jere...@gmail.com wrote:
That appears to be a separate issue - it looks like the height
calculation may be off. Try setting a fixed width on the things that
you are animating the height off - that'll frequently
Not being able to guarantee the order does make this tricky. At least
for now, I'm just looking for something to improve our reliability in
UI, even if we don't provide this as a guaranteed method for putting
your handler at the top of the stack.
As for why we want to do this, we're modifying
Very interesting patch - sorry I apparently missed it/forgot about it
before. I'm loving the speed improvements (loaded up IE7 and I'm
seeing 2x+ improvements across the board - along with Firefox, etc.)
There are a bunch of points though that we'll need to take into consideration:
1) This isn't
+1, nice work mike!
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:25 PM, John Resig jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Very interesting patch - sorry I apparently missed it/forgot about it
before. I'm loving the speed improvements (loaded up IE7 and I'm
seeing 2x+ improvements across the board - along with Firefox, etc.)
As Klaus said, it isn't a bug. It is just how a browser will
'normalize' the html. And actually, we're talking about CSS. CSS 2.1
to be exact, and as I pointed out, the W3C specifically states that
quotes are optional. Therefore, a browser can normalize the quotes
however they want. That being
If you mean another additional method, I could see some merit in that.
If you mean to calculate both the height and width every time you call
height or width, I think that would do more negative impact than good.
On Feb 13, 5:20 pm, Dimi Paun d...@zipalong.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:10
Here's an example that breaks in Firefox :
div id=b
div id=a style=width:100px; height: 100px; background-image: url
('rack a.jpg') /div
/div
script
window.onload = function() {
var x = document.getElementById(b)
// image visible
x.innerHTML = x.innerHTML
// image not visible
}
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 14:28 -0800, mike.helgeson wrote:
If you mean another additional method, I could see some merit in that.
Yes, that's what I meant.
If you mean to calculate both the height and width every time you call
height or width, I think that would do more negative impact than
Ok, so I took some time and read through the patch more completely. It
didn't seem like much had actually changed so I wanted to figure out
the differences. The performance comes from two places:
1) Not using .is(:visible) (that speeds up height/width).
2) Re-organizing inner/outerWidth so that
The querySelectorAll returns elements in documents order, but Sizzle
(for now?) treat each selector separately.
Maybe this can be easily resolved joining each result array in one
with nodes in documents order?
If so, maybe something like this would help (not tested). Or you are
thinking to sort
Very nice... all so quick too! :)
--
Brandon Aaron
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 5:00 PM, John Resig jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, so I took some time and read through the patch more completely. It
didn't seem like much had actually changed so I wanted to figure out
the differences. The
Go ahead and file a bug at Mozilla. This has nothing to do with
jQuery.
The CSS spec requires to escape a space for unquoted urls and a quick
test in FF3 revealed that the following works fine:
style=background-image: url(load\ ing.gif)
Try to use such url in the first place and your problem
The CSS spec requires to escape a space for unquoted urls and a quick
test in FF3 revealed that the following works fine:
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#uri
--Klaus
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Robert,
I have also needed this bit of help from jQuery...for extracting texts
from HTML code.
I proposed this similar solution on the Sizzle group some time ago:
http://groups.google.com/group/sizzlejs/browse_thread/thread/44d2b3fd5d532b5b
which probably solves with a simpler sort() on the
Scott,
if I recall correctly, the solution to this maybe in the way the click
event works.
click = mousedown + mouseup
if you setup three handlers, one for each of the above events you
should see them fire in this order:
mousedown - mouseup - click
Don't use the alert() to show them they
Reasons why maybe an joinResults would be better/faster instead of an
sort are this:
1) Single selector (without comma) will easily return nodes in
document order and with no duplicates, so we have not to worry about
single selector results order and duplicates.
2) If we sort the final array we
29 matches
Mail list logo
