On 12 Jul 2010, at 20:56, Michael Jones wrote: > Just curious why you would use those methods instead of just accessing the > named element directly? Seems like they aren't as specific and potentially > add more work.
In Merrill's example, his input field didn't have an ID, so staying true to his code, I was unable to access it by ID. And, since the name is an array collection, I'm not sure how to access it by name directly. Is there a way? > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Wade Preston Shearer < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On 12 Jul 2010, at 17:25, Merrill Oveson wrote: >> >> With jQuery, I'd do it like this: >> >> http://anavidesign.com/temp/jquery.html > > This is going to attach to all input elements though. If you just needed the > value of the item_position element, you'd want to set an ID and use the > selector on that particular item, no? > > $('input').change(function() { Yes, I just wrote the code generally as an example. >> With raw javascript, like this: >> >> http://anavidesign.com/temp/raw.html > > The main problem with this is knowing which element is which. Is there any > benefit to using .elements[n] over using the named item? I'm pretty sure > named elements work in all recent browsers (IE 6+ included). I'm not sure if IE 6 supports it or not, but yes, I believe the most recent versions of the major browsers do now support selecting by name. But, once again, I'm not sure how that works with the array grouping. _______________________________________________ UPHPU mailing list [email protected] http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net
