Prev: Twitter is an Incompetent Mess
Next: Alexandria city sightseeing, over day trips, overnight tours & shore excursions from Alexandria port
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 11 Jun 2010 09:12
SM wrote:

> SAM wrote:
>> function sayMe () {
>> if(this.href) alert(this.href);
>> else alert('no href !');
>> return false;}
>>
>> function triggerPlays() {
>> var play_btns = $('a[class=btn_play]'), n = play_btns.length;
>> if(n && n.length>0)
>> while(n--) play_btns[n].onclick = sayMe;
>> else play_btns.onclick = sayMe;
>>
>> }
>
> it works! ...

It is still a bad idea, because you could have easily done without the loop
and 20K+ of jQuery needed for $(), thanks to built-in event bubbling:

document.body.onclick = function (e) {
if (!e)
{
e = window.event;
}

if (e)
{
var t = e.target || e.srcElement;
if (t && t.tagName.toUpperCase() == "A" && t.className == "btn_play")
{
window.alert(t.href || "no href");
}
}
};

(or wrappers that do more feature testing and prefer the standards-compliant
approach of adding the event listener)


PointedEars
--
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 11 Jun 2010 09:30
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> SM wrote:
>> SAM wrote:
>>> function sayMe () {
>>> if(this.href) alert(this.href);
>>> else alert('no href !');
>>> return false;}
>>>
>>> function triggerPlays() {
>>> var play_btns = $('a[class=btn_play]'), n = play_btns.length;
>>> if(n && n.length>0)
>>> while(n--) play_btns[n].onclick = sayMe;
>>> else play_btns.onclick = sayMe;
>>>
>>> }
>>
>> it works! ...
>
> It is still a bad idea, because you could have easily done without the
> loop and 20K+ of jQuery needed for $(), thanks to built-in event bubbling:
>
> document.body.onclick = function (e) {
> if (!e)
> {
> e = window.event;
> }
>
> if (e)
> {
> var t = e.target || e.srcElement;
> if (t && t.tagName.toUpperCase() == "A" && t.className ==
> "btn_play")
> {
> window.alert(t.href || "no href");
> }

I forgot the `return false' above, so insert here

if (typeof e.returnValue != "undefined")
{
e.returnValue = false;
}

if (/^\s*(function|object)\s*$/.test(typeof e.preventDefault)
&& e.preventDefault != null)
{
e.preventDefault();
}

(or statements to that effect)

> }
> };
>
> (or wrappers that do more feature testing and prefer the
> standards-compliant approach of adding the event listener)


PointedEars
--
Use any version of Microsoft Frontpage to create your site.
(This won't prevent people from viewing your source, but no one
will want to steal it.)
-- from <http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm> (404-comp.)
From: David Mark on 11 Jun 2010 10:52
On Jun 11, 9:12 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...(a)web.de>
wrote:
> SM wrote:
> > SAM wrote:
> >> function sayMe () {
> >> if(this.href) alert(this.href);
> >> else alert('no href !');
> >> return false;}
>
> >> function triggerPlays() {
> >> var play_btns = $('a[class=btn_play]'), n = play_btns.length;
> >> if(n && n.length>0)
> >> while(n--) play_btns[n].onclick = sayMe;
> >> else play_btns.onclick = sayMe;
>
> >> }
>
> > it works! ...
>
> It is still a bad idea, because you could have easily done without the loop
> and 20K+ of jQuery needed for $(), thanks to built-in event bubbling:

You mean 70K+. They claim 20K "compressed" for the "production"
version. Of course, that's not the size of the file that you put on
your server. The server may or may not zip it per request; but
regardless, it is decidedly inconvenient to try to compare zipped
sizes with other (normally unzipped) assets. In general, disingenuous
marketing has made it awkward to talk about the relative sizes of Web
page assets. Dojo likes to talk about "over the wire" sizes. That's
there way of saying they aren't going to tell you the size that
matters, but rather a number that makes their scripts sound smaller
(e.g. in comparison to HTML documents that sit next to them on the
server).
From: David Mark on 11 Jun 2010 10:55
On Jun 11, 8:27 am, SM <servandomont...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 6:09 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 11, 1:01 am, SM <servandomont...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Using the selection on the left panel, I load the results on the right
> > > panel using jQuery Ajax. So far it's working really good:
>
> > > ...
> > > $.ajax({
> > >    url: "includes/content.php",
> > >    data: "letter=" + letter.substr(letter.lastIndexOf("=") + 1),
>
> > >    success: function(data) {
> > >       $('#wrapper').removeClass("loading");
> > >       $('#content').html(data).fadeIn(400);
> > >    }});
>
> > > ...
>
> > > After the results are loaded on the right panel, I click on an <a> tag
> > > that is suppose to trigger some javascript but doesn't:
>
> > > inside php file:
> > > <a class="btn_play">Play</a>
>
> > > javasscript to trigger:
> > > $('a[class=btn_play]').click(function(event) {
> > >    event.preventDefault();
>
> > >    // get the A tag ref
> > >    var file = $(this).attr('href');
>
> > >    alert(file);
>
> > > });
>
> > > The same <a> tag also exists on the left panel and triggers correctly..
> > > But, on the right panel, it doesn't trigger at all! I believe it's
> > > because it doesn't see the javascript.
>
> > > I'm sure this is come out already, but i can't find the solution.
>
> > > Any hints?
>
> > Yes.  Stop using jQuery.  Then you will find that you have to learn (a
> > lot) before you can script browsers.  I know you don't want to hear
> > that, but it's reality.  There are no magic scripts that can turn you
> > into a JS programmer overnight.  This is particularly true of scripts
> > written by overconfident neophytes (e.g. jQuery).
>
> My mistake... wrong forum to write this post.

No, it was the right forum to write this post. You have a shot at
learning something here. If you had posted it to StackOverflow or the
jQuery forum, you would have gotten a bunch of "try this" responses
from jQuery fans (and likely without a discouraging word about using a
dubious 70K script to do what you could accomplish in ten lines of
code). Programming and blind devotion just don't mix. ;)
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 11 Jun 2010 13:50
David Mark wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
>> It is still a bad idea, because you could have easily done without the
>> loop and 20K+ of jQuery needed for $(), thanks to built-in event
>> bubbling:
>
> You mean 70K+

ACK

> They claim 20K "compressed" for the "production" version. [...]

Last I checked, they claimed "24K", but given the real figure it does make
much of a difference.


PointedEars
--
realism: HTML 4.01 Strict
evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
madness: XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
-- Bjoern Hoehrmann
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Twitter is an Incompetent Mess
Next: Alexandria city sightseeing, over day trips, overnight tours & shore excursions from Alexandria port