Prev: Dynamic combo box refreshed when clicked?
Next: JQuery Ajax
From: David Mark on 31 Jul 2010 19:38
On Jul 31, 3:14 pm, Dr J R Stockton <reply1...(a)merlyn.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
> In comp.lang.javascript message <9a0ede24-b5fd-4dec-9785-827148cafc67(a)f2
> 0g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:11:43, David Mark
> <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> posted:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 29, 2:47 pm, Dr J R Stockton <reply1...(a)merlyn.demon.co.uk>
> >wrote:
> >> In comp.lang.javascript message <ffcbe820-a822-4a7d-9651-e4e1db3f7109(a)v6
> >> g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Tue, 27 Jul 2010 19:16:01, David Mark
> >> <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> posted:
>
> >> >On Jul 27, 6:45 pm, Dr J R Stockton <reply1...(a)merlyn.demon.co.uk>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> The field is marked "Status", and positioned after the button; that
> >> >> should be enough.  One will soon detect that it cannot be written to.
>
> >> >If you have to detect it by twiddling with it, you'd failed in your
> >> >design.
>
> >> My design is that users should read the instructions.  First.
>
> >That's the hallmark of a bad design.
>
> No; it's the hallmark of designing for literates.

I don't think so. You shouldn't have to be able to read anything more
than the control labels to use the form you envision.

> The commercial market
> designs for (and often by) illiterates.

The commercial market must design for the LCD user. But that's
irrelevant to the discussion of your bad design, which is causing a
simple form to throw exceptions.

>
> >> In this case it's difficult to think of anything that *can* usefully be
> >> validated independently of the main processing without running any risk
> >> of being restrictive.
>
> >Then why do you have a problem with allowing the enter key to trigger
> >the action?
>
> I don't have a problem with it.

Then do it.

> You think you have a problem.

It's not my form, so I don't think I have a problem. I really don't
care. I tried to help you out with a few basic pointers, which your
massive ego has rejected.

> I
> usually prefer to encourage users to reconsider the input controls, once
> set, before initiating action.

Whatever.

>
> >> Presumably, therefore, you code Web pages, including JavaScript, by
> >> sheer intuition, without needing to read (for example) HTML 4 or ECMA
> >> 262 ?
>
> >That doesn't follow.  We are talking about using your form, not
> >programming.
>
> You're the sort of person who might be in the situation that the page
> helps with.

How so?

> But, if you actually wanted that tool, you'd have written
> it yourself - and marketed it.

It follows that I don't want it. And even if I did want such a thing,
it hardly follows that I would market it.

>
> >> >> >Oh, I see.  Well, on the Web you can't really pick your audience..
>
> >> >> Agreed, for the initial audience (which is why all pages should have, at
> >> >> least, a link to a home page).  But the obtuse can depart whenever they
> >> >> wish.
>
> >> >I'm not following, but you can expect mass departures from that
> >> >particular document (likely within a few seconds of arrival).
>
> >> So be it; it costs me nothing.
>
> >Except the time it took to write, post and promote it.
>
> I don't promote it.  I announced it here; I linked it into my Web site;
> that is all.

I don't want to get into a whole semantic thing with you. The thread
could go on until Christmas.

> It was fun to write; I learned at least two things (three
> if you count how to code to annoy you) while writing it and using this
> thread; and I have a tool to use which I can at need modify.

And good luck with it! :)

> And in
> effect I get free publicity when all your fans read this thread.

I thought you weren't promoting it?

>
>
>
> >> >> >I don't think so.  The document in the IFRAME was rewritten by some
> >> >> >"Merlyn" process of yours, so it didn't come from another domain.  And
> >> >> >regardless, exceptions should be expected by the software and can be
> >> >> >handled easily enough.
>
> >> >> The document as shown in the iframe should be exactly the same as it
> >> >> would be if shown in an ordinary window of the same size.
>
> >> >What are you talking about now?  The issue was the domain it
> >> >originated from.  I know the contents of that IFRAME did not originate
> >> >from mine and the mention of "Merlyn" indicates that it came from some
> >> >domain of yours.  So why the security violation?
>
> >> None, since you chose (wittingly or otherwise) to use a page on my site
> >> to index a page on my site.  If too many people try that, I'll prevent
> >> it, for bandwidth reasons.  I use the page locally, of course.
>
> >You aren't making sense, doc.  I chose a page on my domain.  Something
> >on your server fetched it, added comments to the top and served it to
> >that IFRAME.  I know I wasn't seeing things.
>
> Then say what that page was, so that I may see what you saw.

I've already said what it was, doc. Go back and re-read. And as if
it would matter *which* page anyway. The point is it came from my
domain and then got put through some sort of wringer on your end.

>
> However, if you used the page directly from my site and gave it the
> address of a page elsewhere, you have disregarded the instructions.

For such a "literate" bloke, you sure have trouble following the
conversation. Of course I *used* the page "directly" from your site.
And, as stated six times, I *chose* a page from my site, blatantly
disregarding your voluminous instructions. The point is that your
software shouldn't have blown up as a result.

>
>
>
>
>
> >> >I recognized it, just as I recognized the error console that popped up
> >> >in Opera after it loaded.
>
> >> Then you should say what error it gave.
>
> >I *did*.
>
> >> >> It is the document named in the File
> >> >> field.
>
> >> >Yes.  Well, sort of (see above).
>
> >> >> It serves merely as an example; a real user, having read the
> >> >> instructions, would change it to be one of his own pages.
>
> >> >But I did use one of my own pages.
>
> >> Then it would be helpful to say which, and where.  I cannot test one of
> >> your own pages; but I can test a copy thereof.
>
> >The root document on my domain (though I don't see how that matters).
>
> But you have not said what your domain is.  To define a page, give the
> full URL.

You don't know what my domain is?!

>
> >> It is showing your page; but it is not reading it.  It is in the nature
> >> of iframes that they allow cross-domain viewing, but not cross-domain
> >> examination of innards.  Only by such examination can the purpose be
> >> fulfilled.
>
> >I know.  That is what caused the exception.  I thought you understood
> >that.
>
> >> >> I see no need to read
> >> >> from another (I expect it to read from its own machine, either directly
> >> >> of with both served by Apache or suchlike), and I don't actually know
> >> >> how to.
>
> Go to the URL; browser menu, File, Save As or similar ; then put the new
> local location in the address bar.  It's a fairly well-known technique.
> With a little thought, you can also get the corresponding CSS and even
> an Include file' but neither is essential.

You are talking to yourself now? Take some time off, doc.

>
> A real user would want to do that, in order not to rely on my Web page
> being continuously available; and that is where the page to be indexed
> would be.

I have no interest in downloading that application, so count me as
imaginary. :)

>
> >> Then you are being commercially imprudent.  I don't need you for
> >> debugging; but you do help to improve the instructions - and I may well
> >> need to find them adequate next year.
>
> >How is it commercially imprudent to deny you free debugging sessions?
>
> Well, you do it in a manner which ensures that I'd never consider
> purchasing your services - even though I do have a few spare dollars[*].

That was my aim, doc. ;)

>
> [*] Of the finest manufacture :  Soviet, perhaps.

Where do you keep it? :)
From: David Mark on 3 Aug 2010 06:16
On Aug 2, 4:03 pm, Dr J R Stockton <reply1...(a)merlyn.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
> In comp.lang.javascript message <7a517db8-8c3f-43dc-a95e-3b548d5a7b4f(a)a4
> g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:38:51, David Mark
> <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> posted:
>
> >On Jul 31, 3:14 pm, Dr J R Stockton <reply1...(a)merlyn.demon.co.uk>
> >wrote:
> >> In comp.lang.javascript message <9a0ede24-b5fd-4dec-9785-827148cafc67(a)f2
> >> 0g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:11:43, David Mark
> >> <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> posted:
> >> >> My design is that users should read the instructions.  First.
>
> >> >That's the hallmark of a bad design.
>
> >> No; it's the hallmark of designing for literates.
>
> >I don't think so.  You shouldn't have to be able to read anything more
> >than the control labels to use the form you envision.
>
> You wrote that you had tried to use it with your home page.  Other
> considerations apart, it would only be by reading either the
> instructions or the source code itself that you would have known in
> advance that there is nothing on your home page that it would have
> attempted to index, since your headings neither contain anchors nor have
> IDs.
>
> >> The commercial market
> >> designs for (and often by) illiterates.
>
> >The commercial market must design for the LCD user.  But that's
>
> Liquid Crystal Display?  Don't assume that technical or colloquial
> abbreviations or acronyms favoured in the USA are equally favoured
> elsewhere.
>
> >irrelevant to the discussion of your bad design, which is causing a
> >simple form to throw exceptions.
>
> Your exceptions, as far as I can make out, were all caused by disregard
> of the instructions.
>
> >> >Then why do you have a problem with allowing the enter key to trigger
> >> >the action?
>
> >> I don't have a problem with it.
>
> >Then do it.
>
> It is not necessary.
>
> >> You're the sort of person who might be in the situation that the page
> >> helps with.
>
> >How so?
>
> You write Web pages; they contain links to other pages.  You might want
> also to link to the headings of the current page.
>
> >> And in
> >> effect I get free publicity when all your fans read this thread.
>
> >I thought you weren't promoting it?
>
> No; but in effect you are.

If disparaging equates to promoting in your mind.

>
> >> However, if you used the page directly from my site and gave it the
> >> address of a page elsewhere, you have disregarded the instructions.
>
> >For such a "literate" bloke, you sure have trouble following the
> >conversation.  Of course I *used* the page "directly" from your site.
> >And, as stated six times, I *chose* a page from my site, blatantly
> >disregarding your voluminous instructions.  The point is that your
> >software shouldn't have blown up as a result.
>
> Disregarding instructions leads to failure.  If the gauge on the tank of
> your car reads low at home, that can most easily be fixed by filling the
> tank using your garden hose.  Better to follow the instructions, and put
> in petrol or diesel as appropriate, even though it is more expensive.
>
> Forms written for idiots should indeed work without instructions.  But I
> don't generally write for idiots; although some of them do see my pages,
> happily most are deterred by the style [+].

Well, if you are happy; I suppose that's all that matters. And doc,
if you are happy then I'm happy. :)

>
> >> >> >But I did use one of my own pages.
>
> >> >> Then it would be helpful to say which, and where.  I cannot test one of
> >> >> your own pages; but I can test a copy thereof.
>
> >> >The root document on my domain (though I don't see how that matters).
>
> >> But you have not said what your domain is.  To define a page, give the
> >> full URL.
>
> >You don't know what my domain is?!
>
> No.  I could guess; but I don't remember.  The way to indicate a page is
> to give a URL; or, if the site be known, a relative location.

Or you could use Google. Last I checked "My Library" yielded Google's
#1 and mine #2. And they said that name would never work. :)

>
> >> >> >> I see no need to read
> >> >> >> from another (I expect it to read from its own machine, either directly
> >> >> >> of with both served by Apache or suchlike), and I don't actually know
> >> >> >> how to.
>
> You may (occasionally, not to waste bandwidth), use it in that manner,
> although it was not intended for that.  My expectation is that it will
> only usefully work to index parts of my own site.  In that manner, you
> could check my indexes, which may not all be up-to-date.

Whatever, doc.

>
> As it happens, you would I think also have got a result applicable to
> (but not derived from) your home page - that includes "Start with the
> documentation, ..."
>
> Perhaps if I were to read your documentation I would see why at least
> one of your examples (Reveal) gives me an error box in IE 8 :
>    Message: 'undefined' is null or not an object

Mea culpa. I'm sure that obvious bug would happen in any browser. In
the Reveal example, where I generate the options for showElement, I
had:-

return options;

....I should have had:-

return options || {};

Clearly my testing of that example was lacking. Thanks doc! It's
fixed.

> but does nothing in FF 3.0.19 (which seems to like very little about
> your CSS),

Of course that example "does nothing" in FF3. It is a CSS3
demonstration (that manages to muddle through with DirectX in IE).
The point is that the interface is *disabled* in browsers that are
lacking the needed features. ;)

It's not an application (like yours). It's a demonstration of
progressive enhancement. And yes, it is documented as such:-

"Transform

The Transform add-on adds CSS3 2D transform functions to the API, as
well as adding several new effects and augmenting the object wrappers
when available.

These examples have been tested in Internet Explorer 5.5-8, Firefox
3.6, Safari 4, Chrome 3 and Opera 10.5. They were found to degrade
properly in older or otherwise incompatible browsers."

First two paragraphs, doc. What are you? An idiot? :)

>
> "(Code will appear hear when popup is shown)" - I do dislike noisy
> popups; and it's surely not like you to omit a semicolon.

The test in question is for the Alert add-on. It's not a popup window
but a DIV-based dialog. So whether you dislike it or not, that's what
it tests. ;)

>
> By the way, readers of a page may wish to keep, or give to someone else,
> a local copy for reference.  It is then likely to be useful, at least in
> cites which rightly use relative inter-page links, to put on each page a
> full absolute link to its current self on its Web server.

I'll keep that in mind, doc.

>
> Also, when setting a sans-serif font, one should avoid words like
> "corners" because that will look so very like "comers".

I'm not writing that word (or others like it) out of my vocabulary to
suit some font.

>
> >>- even though I do have a few spare dollars[*].
> >> [*] Of the finest manufacture :  Soviet, perhaps.
>
> >Where do you keep it?  :)
>
> Them.  Where I keep bookmarks.

Planning on taking a holiday this summer? :)

>
> I should point out that, if you were to read the present instructions on
> the page in question, you would see that it can now index your home
> page.

Oh good. Since you did me a favor, I will try it again (whenever I
have time).

> That is not be specific intent, but a consequence of my thinking
> what if anything I might like to see for unanchored headings on my own
> site.

Okay.

>
> Also, taking that with my earlier statement about newly allowing
> indexing of multiple pages provides a sufficiently clear indication that
> your remarks have generally been based on the page as it had been,
> rather than to the page as it was at about the time of your writing.
>
> Those who give advice should never presume that it will all be ignored.
> Or followed.
>
> [+] H'mmm - is that sentence compatible with the fact that one of my
> pages was cited by a committee or other subordinate body of the US
> Congress or Senate ?
>

There's a feather in your cap! :)
From: Bwig Zomberi on 7 Aug 2010 22:40
David Mark wrote:
> On Jul 30, 5:56 am, Bwig Zomberi<zomberiMAPSONNOS...(a)gmail.invalid>
> wrote:
>> David Mark wrote:
>>> You are so eminently predictable, doc. That's exactly what I was
>>> getting at. You are free to affect such non-intrusive styles if you
>>> like. Carry on.
>>
>> Maybe it is time to give up on the "doc" thing. You sound like a
>> hypochondiac.
>
> You might want to look that word up. And, as if it is any of your
> business, Stockton is sort of an Elmer Fudd to my Bugs Bunny. ;)

Bugs Bunny called everyone as "doc" - Daffy, Devil, Wile E.

I don't think Stockton is any sort of Fudd.

>
>> And, when you plug in My Library anywhere, identify your
>> association with it.
>
> What are you talking about? For one, there's no mention of My Library
> here. For two, who on earth doesn't know who wrote it at this point?
> And for three, if they don't know, my name address are at the top of
> every page.

I was referring to other posts where you bashed competing libraries and
intro'd My Library to newcomers as if you were an innocent third party.
First, it is dishonest. More important, it automatically discredits the
good work you have done to My Library. Just say, you have written this
library and the poster should give it a try. Give links to back up your
claims.



--
Bwig Zomberi
From: Bwig Zomberi on 9 Aug 2010 03:16
David Mark wrote:
> On Aug 7, 10:40 pm, Bwig Zomberi<zomberiMAPSONNOS...(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> David Mark wrote:
>>> On Jul 30, 5:56 am, Bwig Zomberi<zomberiMAPSONNOS...(a)gmail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>> David Mark wrote:
>>>>> You are so eminently predictable, doc. That's exactly what I was
>>>>> getting at. You are free to affect such non-intrusive styles if you
>>>>> like. Carry on.
>>
>>>> Maybe it is time to give up on the "doc" thing. You sound like a
>>>> hypochondiac.
>>
>>> You might want to look that word up. And, as if it is any of your
>>> business, Stockton is sort of an Elmer Fudd to my Bugs Bunny. ;)
>>
>> Bugs Bunny called everyone as "doc" - Daffy, Devil, Wile E.
>
> So?

I knew about the doc thing. But, Bugs referred several people as doc and
he didn't keep repeating it like a hypochondriac.


>
>>
>> I don't think Stockton is any sort of Fudd.
>
> You don't know him very well, do you?

I have only the stuff he has put on his website and the posts he has
made here. If you happen to be hunted by him, then you are the expert.

>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> And, when you plug in My Library anywhere, identify your
>>>> association with it.
>>
>>> What are you talking about? For one, there's no mention of My Library
>>> here. For two, who on earth doesn't know who wrote it at this point?
>>> And for three, if they don't know, my name address are at the top of
>>> every page.
>>
>> I was referring to other posts where you bashed competing libraries and
>> intro'd My Library to newcomers as if you were an innocent third party.
>
> Odd choice to respond to this post then. If you have a problem with
> other posts, I suggest you respond to them. But I put it to you that
> you imagined them.

It had to come up here. Anywhere here it is from some post on js coursework.


>David Mark wrote:
>> General-purpose JS libraries and frameworks are also the most
>> challenging of browser scripting projects, so combined with mostly B
>> Team contributors, the results are predictably disastrous.
>>
>> Furthermore, none of the "majors" is capable of supporting >progressive
>> enhancement in any meaningful way. The calling applications have no
>> idea which methods will work and which will fall on their face. This
>> precludes any possibility of graceful degradation in hostile or
>> limited environments.
>>
>> AFAIK, there is but one (comprehensive) GP library that has come >close
>> to delivering a truly cross-browser (and largely maintenance-free)
>> experience, while supporting progressive enhancement.
>>
>> http://www.cinsoft.net/


>> First, it is dishonest.
>
> Something you imagined is dishonest? Again, no matter what you think
> you saw, my name is at the top of every page related to My Library.
>
>> More important, it automatically discredits the
>> good work you have done to My Library.
>
> Your imagination does not discredit anything I have done.
>
>> Just say, you have written this
>> library and the poster should give it a try. Give links to back up your
>> claims.
>>
>
> Claims about what?

And the choice of the name for the library - My Library - is awful.




--
Bwig Zomberi
From: Andrew Poulos on 9 Aug 2010 03:24
On 9/08/2010 5:16 PM, Bwig Zomberi wrote:
> David Mark wrote:
>> On Aug 7, 10:40 pm, Bwig Zomberi<zomberiMAPSONNOS...(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> David Mark wrote:
>>>> On Jul 30, 5:56 am, Bwig Zomberi<zomberiMAPSONNOS...(a)gmail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> David Mark wrote:

>>>>> And, when you plug in My Library anywhere, identify your
>>>>> association with it.
>>>
>>>> What are you talking about? For one, there's no mention of My Library
>>>> here. For two, who on earth doesn't know who wrote it at this point?
>>>> And for three, if they don't know, my name address are at the top of
>>>> every page.
>>>
>>> I was referring to other posts where you bashed competing libraries and
>>> intro'd My Library to newcomers as if you were an innocent third party.
>>
>> Odd choice to respond to this post then. If you have a problem with
>> other posts, I suggest you respond to them. But I put it to you that
>> you imagined them.
>
> It had to come up here. Anywhere here it is from some post on js
> coursework.
>
>
> >David Mark wrote:
> >> General-purpose JS libraries and frameworks are also the most
> >> challenging of browser scripting projects, so combined with mostly B
> >> Team contributors, the results are predictably disastrous.
> >>
> >> Furthermore, none of the "majors" is capable of supporting >progressive
> >> enhancement in any meaningful way. The calling applications have no
> >> idea which methods will work and which will fall on their face. This
> >> precludes any possibility of graceful degradation in hostile or
> >> limited environments.
> >>
> >> AFAIK, there is but one (comprehensive) GP library that has come >close
> >> to delivering a truly cross-browser (and largely maintenance-free)
> >> experience, while supporting progressive enhancement.
> >>
> >> http://www.cinsoft.net/

Yes, while I agree that DM doesn't mention that he's the author of ML
every time he mentions it in a post (big deal) what I don't understand
is why (when the other major GP libraries get bashed on
objective/factual grounds) ML "bashings" read like failed PR campaigns.

Andrew Poulos
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Dynamic combo box refreshed when clicked?
Next: JQuery Ajax