Could anyone explain this statement on the wiki page?
You should always be sure to run your page in standards mode. There
are
known issues with methods not working correctly in quirks
mode (including errors in the selector engine in Safari).
Is there a list of the known issues somewhere? (I
afaik: safari has are issues with case sensitivity and selectors when in
quirks mode.
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Matt m...@thekrusefamily.com wrote:
Could anyone explain this statement on the wiki page?
You should always be sure to run your page in standards mode. There
are
known
Let me put it here because this was opened a month ago, moreover it's
unassigned:
http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/3729
Now attributes seem to have some surplus of backslashes.
On Jan 15, 8:41 pm, John Resig jere...@gmail.com wrote:
afaik: safari has are issues with case sensitivity and selectors
Congrats!
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Briz brizb...@gmail.com 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,
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 jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Everyone -
jQuery 1.3 is out! Full details
here:http://blog.jquery.com/2009/01/14/jquery-13-and-the-jquery-foundation/
Very nice, Thank You!
-- Elijah
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Leeoniya leeon...@gmail.com 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 jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Everyone -
Great job ! Congrats !
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Leeoniya leeon...@gmail.com 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 jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Everyone -
jQuery 1.3 is
On Jan 14, 8:45 am, John Resig jere...@gmail.com 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
On Jan 14, 12:37 pm, John Resig jere...@gmail.com 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
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Matt m...@thekrusefamily.com 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
On Jan 14, 3:11 pm, David Zhou da...@nodnod.net 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
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 11:39 PM, Matt m...@thekrusefamily.com wrote:
On Jan 14, 3:11 pm, David Zhou da...@nodnod.net 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
On Jan 14, 10:52 pm, David Zhou da...@nodnod.net 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.
13 matches
Mail list logo
