On Jan 11, 2008 9:37 AM, Edward Yakop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's not the code for finding the component that bothers me. as you > > said, it's very easy. My problem is that now you have to muck with > > the scriptaculous javascript callback to extract the component path > > instead of just using the default behavior which is to transfer the > > markup id. This makes the code more brittle in my opinion since the > > scriptaculous behavior may change in the future. > I didn't change a single line of scriptaculous code. > You could verify by md5sum on each of the js files and compare to the > latest scriptaculous 1.8.1.
I didn't mean you changed "scriptaculoius". i meant that you really customized the rendered *scriptaculous javascript*. I've seen the sourcecode and remain unconvinced that this is simpler than using the markup ID. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
