On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Olli Pettay wrote:
On 6/25/09 11:44 AM, Olli Pettay wrote:
currently 6.11.9 History traversal doesn't seem to handle nested
hashchange events too well. If there is a fragment id change to A,
hashchange is dispatched, then if the listener changes the fragment to
On 6/25/09 11:44 AM, Olli Pettay wrote:
Hi all,
currently 6.11.9 History traversal doesn't seem to handle
nested hashchange events too well.
If there is a fragment id change to A, hashchange is dispatched, then
if the listener changes the fragment to B, there is a new hashchange and
after that
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Olli Pettay wrote:
Also, what is the reason for if the Document's current document
readiness is the string 'complete' requirement? I often click
fragment links
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Olli Pettay wrote:
Also, what is the reason for if the Document's current document
readiness is
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Olli Pettay wrote:
Also, what is the reason for if the Document's current document
readiness is the string 'complete' requirement? I often click fragment
links while the page is still loading, especially when
And it seems like IE scrolls first and then dispatches hashchange events.
On 6/25/09 11:44 AM, Olli Pettay wrote:
Hi all,
currently 6.11.9 History traversal doesn't seem to handle
nested hashchange events too well.
If there is a fragment id change to A, hashchange is dispatched, then
if the
IE8 seems to fire hashchange asynchronously.
So it fires some time after window.location = somenewvalue; has been
called.
Perhaps asynchronous firing is good enough (and it certainly is easier
to implement safely) and could be added to the spec.
-Olli
On 6/25/09 1:46 PM, Olli Pettay wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Olli Pettay wrote:
currently 6.11.9 History traversal doesn't seem to handle
nested hashchange events too well.
Oops. 'hashchange' is supposed to be asynchronous. My bad. Fixed.
If there is a fragment id change to A, hashchange is dispatched, then if
the listener
