On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 06:33:28PM -0400, Colin Angevine wrote:
> I took a look at the example on the Scriptaculous site and I'm still a
> bit unclear. I'm already using the informal class, and it makes good
> sense to use it again (with a display:none there) but I'm not sure how
> I'll be able to
> Just out of curiousity Sam, I notice that you are a frequent poster to
> this list. Are you writing anything specific or just having fun with
> javascript and prototype? Anything you can show off here?
>
I'm working on an environment to host e-learning course content.
Unfortunately I can't send
I took a look at the example on the Scriptaculous site and I'm still a
bit unclear. I'm already using the informal class, and it makes good
sense to use it again (with a display:none there) but I'm not sure how
I'll be able to retrieve that id number once the user selects it. Just
a bit more conte
Sam,
How about trying something like the following -
for( var myVariable in window ) {
document.write( myVariable + ' = ' + window[myVariable] + '' );
}
The above code outputs all properties/methods of the window object.
So, you could put in your object in place of "window"
Hi all,
Is there any way to take a block element, grow it a percentage from its
current size on mouseover and then shrink it back on mouseout? I'm looking
to recreate the nav on this site http://www.dot-gap.com/ without using
Flash.
Cheers,
Leon
___
I don't. :)
For Ruby people it makes sure it's the same method, for others we can
have an alias. :)
Anyway, uniq (and uniq!) are members of the Array class[1], not the
Enumerable class, so it probably
should be added to arrays only.
-Thomas
[1] http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Array.
It looks to me like it creates a new element of that classname. Oh,
off-topic a little bit, if you guys are interested, a friend of mine made
some tweaks to prototype, check out www.beauscott.com for info.
--Will
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Beh
To be a tad picky, uniq is only part of Array, not Enumerable in Ruby.
On 8/14/06, Hill, Greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree with Ryan, uniq saves you two letters and makes you cringe every
time you write or read it. Ruby should seriously fix that.
Greg
_
Hi everyone. New to the list.
I'm trying to implement a "shelf" with Scriptaculous. I have five boxes
(divs) at the top of my page, to which I would like users to be able to
drag and drop ghosts of various elements (also divs) from the body of
the page. This operation should be a copy, not a m
Prototype.js can be humbling. Just when I think I've got a handle on how to
read inside-out, I find something I've never seen before and can't get my
head around.
I am chasing down a bug in my code which uses Element.classNames, so I
wandered off in prototype.js to see how classNames worked.
Co
I agree with Ryan, uniq saves you two
letters and makes you cringe every time you write or read it. Ruby should
seriously fix that.
Greg
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Gahl
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:08
AM
To: rails-spinoffs@lists
btw, there's also a ticket on this, #3810, but the trac is currently
not in working order--
note that there's a new server on the way[1].
-Thomas
[1] http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2006/8/10/new-dedicated-trac-server-
on-the-way
Am 14.08.2006 um 17:11 schrieb Jay Miller:
I'd be concerned ab
Mostly there! I had a few "lightbulb" moments, and some of my hackish
code seemed to work.
I wanted a draggable which would revert when it didn't hit a droppable,
and which would "snap" into place as a child of the droppable if it did.
Mr. Ben Kimball
//
BUT, wait just a second Thomas :-)Remember a lot of us aren't Ruby-jockies... keep the function names _descriptive_ please :-) "unique" is better than uniq IMHOOn 8/14/06,
Thomas Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That method should be named "uniq" (to match the ruby enumerables, whichPrototype heav
Hi Tim... I'm sorry that I'm not replying to the actual topic, but could you please use "reply-to" in your email program so you don't break the threading... When I joined the list I had my own etiquette issues which others politely corrected for me (right Jeremy?)... so don't feel like I'm singling
Sam,
How
about trying something like the following -
for( var myVariable in window )
{ document.write( myVariable + ' =
' + window[myVariable] + '' );
}
The
above code outputs all properties/methods of the window
object.
So,
you could put in your object in place
Not sure if this is what you are looking for or not but I've been
using this Logger http://gleepglop.com/javascripts/logger/ with a fair
amount of success. It doesn't format that well in Safari and doesn't
position correctly at first in IE but getting past that it works
great. It has an inspect fu
Hi,
On 08/14/2006, Vasilis Dourdounis wrote:
> I'm not sure though the following is the best way to solve it, but
> does exactly what you describe.
yes, your solution gives me the information I need, but now I am
wondering why the onStart and onStop handlers get called for every item
of the sorta
Title: Message
After reading the replies to Dean's article http://dean.edwards.name/weblog/2006/04/easy-xml/
it turns out that IE does support requestXML.documentElement , at least, Dean
found that it did work after a while, but he doesn't explain what
changed.
To my complete amazement, it
Short of finding a full debugging tool for IE (VS.NET or VWD supply this but may not work well for your project) or creating your own robust object inspector, I'd say simply serializing your object like that in JSON is about the quickest way to get the debug info you really need.
On 8/14/06, Sam <[
Title: Message
I’ve always been able to get the documentElement
in IE, but I’ve always used text/xml, so maybe that is the key.
Greg
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bauser, Joseph (Joe)
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:25
AM
To: rails-spinoffs
Tommy,
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Overriding the method in
controls.js seems like an effective approach, but after looking
through the JavaScript for almost an hour I'm having a hard time
figuring out how I should go about doing this. A few questions:
-Which method should I be ove
Colin Angevine wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm hoping to use the Ajax.Autocompleter to help users send private
> messages to other users on my site. As the user types in the name of
> another user, Ajax.Autocompleter steps in and offers a few relevant
> options to help them along. Once they find the
I have code and
objects which work great in Firefox, and blow up in IE. I don't have an
object inspector in IE comparable to Firefox's Firebug and am contemplating
finding a function call to layout an object in text format so I could read it
from my own debug console.
I'm considering
usi
You can also us the member function for arrays:
function myFunc(param1) {
if ([2,3,4,5,6].member(param1)) { // is param1 a member of the array?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brandon
Aaron
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 8:51 PM
To: r
I'd be concerned about the extreme lack of efficiency with that implementation. The algorithm is exponential, and worse than that, in one of the most common cases does no work at all despite taking so much time. I wouldn't use it in the library directly.
On 8/14/06, Thomas Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Title: Message
I
believe you have to use the getAttribute() method when navigating XML to get the
attribute values.
I've
heard rumors that you can use documentElement in IE as long as your document
mime type is set to 'text/xml' for the XML you're retrieving. But I don't have
an XML sourc
I had a similar issue.I'm not sure though the following is the best way to solve it, but does exactly what you describe. var MyStartEndObserver =
Class.create(); MyStartEndObserver.prototype = { initialize:
That method should be named "uniq" (to match the ruby enumerables, which
Prototype heavily borrows from), and should be added to the Prototype
enumerables-- seems like a nice extension. :)
-Thomas
Am 14.08.2006 um 00:06 schrieb Martin Ström:
And the little more elegant, prototypish way ;)
Obj
No problem. Seth mentioned in a followup post that it needed to be a
'recentish' version of prototype, but I just checked 1.4 provided on
http://prototype.conio.net and found it there as well. Anyone using
anything less than 1.4 deserves the pain of that choice... ;)
Just out of curiousity Sam, I
ColinI've sort of done this with a Local.Autocompleter (show text and hide ID, submit ID when item is selected).In order to do this you need to override the methods that write the resultdiv and the method that run when an item is selected.
You can override any method of the Ajax.Autocompleter by si
31 matches
Mail list logo
