> Awesome, thanks John. So UI 1.7 should be around the corner as well?
Let's hope so! You'll have to ask the UI team :-) I think they're
getting real close, though.
--John
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gr
Hi Everyone -
Full details here:
http://docs.jquery.com/Release:jQuery_1.3.2
Enjoy!
--John
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-de
The issue reported in tracker no. 3778 is causing difficulties when
using jQuery alongside the Spring MVC framework, as the framework uses
input names such as 'foo.bar[val]' for binding on Java objects. I was
just curious as to whether this ticket item is currently being looked
at as a fix in the
Is 1.3.2 released? There's been no announcement but the jQuery home
page says
Current Release: v.1.3.2
and it says 1.3.2 in the file that downloads...
On Feb 19, 8:36 am, John Resig wrote:
> I've filed a bug and will be following up:http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/4195
>
> --John
>
> On Thu, Fe
as requested, cheers
http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/4204
On Feb 20, 3:25 pm, John Resig wrote:
> Possibly. Could you file a ticket on it?
> Thanks!http://dev.jquery.com/newticket
>
> --John
>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, jquery.redsqu...@googlemail.com
>
> wrote:
>
> > If I fadeOut an el
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Mika Tuupola wrote:
>
> On Feb 19, 2009, at 4:07 PM, Paul Bakaus wrote:
>
> > Yeah, Richard had to change our templates to be able to better
> > include it directly
> > into our site.
> >
> > I'm sure he'll respond with a mail to this thread as well, he can
> > exp
Possibly. Could you file a ticket on it? Thanks!
http://dev.jquery.com/newticket
--John
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, jquery.redsqu...@googlemail.com
wrote:
>
> If I fadeOut an element then ask it to fadeTo at present the element
> remains with display:none. Should fadeTo auto set the ele
If I fadeOut an element then ask it to fadeTo at present the element
remains with display:none. Should fadeTo auto set the element to
visible first?
Quick demo
http://jsbin.com/ajegi
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Filed: http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/4200
Thanks!
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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.com
To unsubscribe from thi
Yeah, I just tossed that on the roadmap as well.
--John
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Karl Swedberg wrote:
> Along the same lines, I vaguely recall some talk a while ago about allowing
> a function as the "setter" argument for .css() -- like we have in .attr()
> -- and maybe for .val(), .
Along the same lines, I vaguely recall some talk a while ago about
allowing a function as the "setter" argument for .css() -- like we
have in .attr() -- and maybe for .val(), .html(), and .text() as well.
Is that still on the table? Maybe for 1.4 roadmap?
--Karl
Karl Swedberg
On Feb 19, 2009, at 4:07 PM, Paul Bakaus wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:54 PM, John Resig wrote:
>
> I think the UI guys may have changed their format - not completely
> sure.
>
> Yeah, Richard had to change our templates to be able to better
> include it directly
> into our site.
>
Filed: http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/4200
--
Már
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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.com
To unsubscribe from this gr
On Feb 19, 11:14 am, John Resig wrote:
> Does this syntax conflict with what's current done for PHP?
> foo[]=bar&foo[]=baz
Yes, PHP will create arrays for foo[] and associative arrays for foo
[bar]. Here's the code I use for dealing with PHP: http://codedumper.com/awuqe
--~--~-~--~---
Hmm... can't think of one off-hand. Would you mind filing a quick ticket?
http://dev.jquery.com/newticket
Thanks!
--John
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:36 AM, Már Örlygsson wrote:
>
> I was bitten by my assumption that $.fn.not was simply an inversed
> $.fn.filter() ...
> ...which it isn't, as it
I was bitten by my assumption that $.fn.not was simply an inversed
$.fn.filter() ...
...which it isn't, as it doesn't accept functions as an argument.
Is there a good reason (API-wise) for this difference?
--
Már
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message be
Hi,
> looks interesting
>
> http://getsprockets.org/
Looks a bit like server side jspax written in ruby.
The pro side over jspax is that there will be only one js file and thus only
one request to the server for a js file.
The con side is, that all scripts must be loaded at the beginning
It would be nice to have a function in the code to generate a 'query'
selector path to any element from any containing element. Sort of like
a jQuery equivalent of an xpath.
I just put together the following as an example of what it might look
like (can probably be made more efficient .. and I'm n
By the way, I have re-posted this in the jquery-ui-dev list, but just
to clarify...
I don't mean simple language internationalization, I mean supporting
multiple calendar systems,
for example the Coptic Calendar which which has 13 months, twelve with
exactly 30 days each and one variable (dependi
19 matches
Mail list logo
