Prev: ECMA-262-3 in detail. Chapter 4. Scope chain.
Next: FAQ Topic - What is the Document Object Model (DOM)? (2010-03-22)
From: David Mark on 23 Mar 2010 15:41
Jorge wrote:
> On Mar 23, 5:48 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Get better, Jorge!
>
> I'm all right. Thanks.

Then what's with all of the blithering? Performance art?
From: Jorge on 23 Mar 2010 15:41
On Mar 23, 6:39 pm, Thomas Allen <thomasmal...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 21, 5:22 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > As I've said before, if you find yourself leaning towards a design that
> > modifies the location hash because you think that an app can't be
> > "modern" or "robust" or "fast" without such hack-ery, think again.
> > There's always a better design (and often it involves leveraging what
> > the browser does best, which is _browsing_).
>
> What you're not mentioning is that some developers use the location
> hash to this effect because it allows them to use JavaScript to get
> around all of the things that browsers do poorly, specifically
> maintaining state and other data in a user session, and maintaining a
> steady user interface. Any page-based approach involves page refreshes
> rather than simple Ajax requests, wiping the page and interrupting the
> user's activities.
>
> >  Doesn't work in IE < 8 (or IE8 compatibility views of course)
>
> Why do you say that? The technique I'm using works in IE6, 7, and
> onward. Perhaps you're referring to the use of the new onhashchange
> event being pushed...developers have been aping that for a while by
> checking the hash's value at an interval.

Exactly, absolutely.

And, the fact that state saved at whatever the client-side storage
means at your disposal, can't be sent along with a url:

mySite/myApp?someParams#someState
--
Jorge.
From: Jorge on 23 Mar 2010 15:47
On Mar 23, 8:41 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Jorge wrote:
> > On Mar 23, 5:48 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Get better, Jorge!
>
> > I'm all right. Thanks.
>
> Then what's with all of the blithering?  Performance art?

IE awakes my assassin instincts. KILL KILL KILL IT !

In my logs: still 13% IE6. GRRRRRRR !
--
Jorge.
From: David Mark on 23 Mar 2010 16:08
Jorge wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:39 pm, Thomas Allen <thomasmal...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 5:22 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> As I've said before, if you find yourself leaning towards a design that
>>> modifies the location hash because you think that an app can't be
>>> "modern" or "robust" or "fast" without such hack-ery, think again.
>>> There's always a better design (and often it involves leveraging what
>>> the browser does best, which is _browsing_).
>> What you're not mentioning is that some developers use the location
>> hash to this effect because it allows them to use JavaScript to get
>> around all of the things that browsers do poorly, specifically
>> maintaining state and other data in a user session, and maintaining a
>> steady user interface. Any page-based approach involves page refreshes
>> rather than simple Ajax requests, wiping the page and interrupting the
>> user's activities.
>>
>>> Doesn't work in IE < 8 (or IE8 compatibility views of course)
>> Why do you say that? The technique I'm using works in IE6, 7, and
>> onward. Perhaps you're referring to the use of the new onhashchange
>> event being pushed...developers have been aping that for a while by
>> checking the hash's value at an interval.
>
> Exactly, absolutely.

Which bit are you heartily agreeing with?

>
> And, the fact that state saved at whatever the client-side storage
> means at your disposal, can't be sent along with a url:
>
> mySite/myApp?someParams#someState

So what? Are you espousing some sort of one-size-fits-all application
design that is irretrievably hinged on setting the hash with script?
Show me any _specific_ design like that and I'll show you a better way...
From: David Mark on 23 Mar 2010 16:09
Jorge wrote:
> On Mar 23, 8:41 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jorge wrote:
>>> On Mar 23, 5:48 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Get better, Jorge!
>>> I'm all right. Thanks.
>> Then what's with all of the blithering? Performance art?
>
> IE awakes my assassin instincts. KILL KILL KILL IT !

Whoa, okay settle down Jorge. I knew you were just passing for sane
there for a moment. It's going to be okay. MS is not conspiring to
kill you, so it is illogical for you to want to "kill" their browser.

>
> In my logs: still 13% IE6. GRRRRRRR !

LOL. So, you see reality as just an inconvenience for your delusions?
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: ECMA-262-3 in detail. Chapter 4. Scope chain.
Next: FAQ Topic - What is the Document Object Model (DOM)? (2010-03-22)