Prev: My Library API Reference error
Next: How to control (disable/enable) all onclick events
From: johnwlockwood on 25 Mar 2010 23:20
I just subscribed to this list this morning and after reading some of
the recent threads, I feel like I've tapped into some people who are
really in-the-know when it comes to Javascript. and was turned on to
my library
I think I'm liking it so far. I've been a jQuery user for a few of
years and have to say I really enjoyed what I could do with it. I
haven't really closely examined the inner workings of jQuery with a
fine tooth comb, so wasn't really in a position to say it was designed
well or not, just that it seemed to work as advertised.

As someone who doesn't want to fix websites when new browsers come
out, I'd like to depend on a library that has a better chance of
accomplishing this. It seems I've arrived at an opportune time.

I've been asked about doing a project that involved using a
bookmarklet to run javascript that would change a the current
webpage(add some kind of overlay or iframe) and allow some cross
domain scripting. I found the easyXDM library, that seems like it
should be helpful. the site http://reframeit.com/ uses it with their
product.
Does anyone here have experience with this sort of thing?

Thanks,
-John

From: David Mark on 26 Mar 2010 01:55
johnwlockwood wrote:
> I just subscribed to this list this morning and after reading some of
> the recent threads, I feel like I've tapped into some people who are
> really in-the-know when it comes to Javascript.

You have. Browser scripting too!

> and was turned on to
> my library
> I think I'm liking it so far.

It will only get better. :)

> I've been a jQuery user for a few of
> years and have to say I really enjoyed what I could do with it. I
> haven't really closely examined the inner workings of jQuery with a
> fine tooth comb, so wasn't really in a position to say it was designed
> well or not, just that it seemed to work as advertised.

The operative word is "seemed", of course.

>
> As someone who doesn't want to fix websites when new browsers come
> out, I'd like to depend on a library that has a better chance of
> accomplishing this. It seems I've arrived at an opportune time.

You have indeed. The currently popular "majors" are all based on
observations made at the time of their authoring. If you look at their
history, getting from version A to version B of even the handful of
browsers they claim to support (a peek at their history as documented in
their bug trackers and support forums easily contradicts such claims),
it isn't hard to imagine that getting to version C is going to be
another round of observations and rewrites. Invariably, such strategies
break the previous browser versions, which has led to the developers
justifying their obvious ineptitude by claiming not to care about
anything released more than a year ago. Of course, site visitors using
such browsers (and some are literally stuck with them) are oblivious to
the delusions of JS library authors and dutifully stop caring about
sites that foolishly swap yesterday's "cross-browser" library for
today's. Furthermore, those who don't have the time or budget to get
through yet another "upgrade" and re-test end up with sites that fail in
today's browsers, which is even worse. It's an endless cycle of "damned
if you do, damned if you don't" futility.

For example, the latest reworking of Dojo claims only to support Safari
4 and Opera 10. From running tests on their pivotal query engine in
Opera 9 (abysmal failures abound), it is clear that they really don't
care enough to learn how to write cross-browser scripts and are passing
the losses onto site owners foolish enough to buy into the idea that
Dojo could save them time and money by providing a buffer between the
"buggy browsers" and their Web developers. Of course, the punch line is
that this low-level functionality, which is used extensively by Dojo
apps (and even internally by Dojo itself) doesn't work that much better
in Opera 10. I guess they don't support Europe. :)

It's the same basic story with jQuery and the rest, but Dojo is easily
the most incompetent example I've seen (and thank God it hasn't and
won't ever reach widespread acceptance on the Web). I've talked to
their developers extensively, tried to tell them where they were going
wrong, but they just can't/won't get their brains around the
demonstrable fact that they have failed miserably in their chosen field
(I'm sure the truth hurts too much for their egos to accept). The fact
that, even in a field rife with incompetence, their effort has gone
largely untapped doesn't seem to phase them either (in their minds, if
they keep repeating the same mistakes, eventually it will lead to
success). :)

And make no mistake, not a one of these projects has come anywhere near
mastering IE (which is absurd as that is the one browser they should
have been concentrating on all of these years). The authors tend to
exhibit a hostile attitude towards that browser and many seem determined
to wish it out of existence (the Dojo contributors all but "abolished"
IE6/7 recently, but I talked the owners out of it at the last second).
Imagine, corporate customers are their only market and that's where
IE6/7 is entrenched. And, oh by the way, IE8 can work just like IE7 at
the click of a button (handily featured right next to the refresh
button). They know this too as they recommend to the poor sap's stuck
with last year's Dojo to "force" IE8 into compatibility mode, which by
default maps to IE7 standards mode. That's their "solution" for
customers who can't/won't download yet another incompatible version of Dojo.

Are these Dojo people stupid beyond belief? I don't think that's the
case. A few of them actually work for IBM. I was there in the late
80's and unless IQ's have dropped like stones in the decades since, they
can't all be morons. The thing is, it is very easy to get overconfident
in browser scripting and programmers are often too arrogant to step back
and have a good look at their failings. Fine for them to fail miserably
at their weekend hobby, but for God's sake, don't buy into it because
they have some shiny widgets. ;)

>
> I've been asked about doing a project that involved using a
> bookmarklet to run javascript that would change a the current
> webpage(add some kind of overlay or iframe) and allow some cross
> domain scripting. I found the easyXDM library, that seems like it
> should be helpful. the site http://reframeit.com/ uses it with their
> product.
> Does anyone here have experience with this sort of thing?
>

Been a long day, but I'd be glad to review the library tomorrow. Don't
get your hopes up though. I mean, I'll review it for sure, but it isn't
likely to pass muster. ;)

The good news is that you can likely do the same thing with My Library
or even learn enough here to do it yourself. Stay tuned...
From: David Mark on 26 Mar 2010 11:51
johnwlockwood wrote:

[...]

>
> I've been asked about doing a project that involved using a
> bookmarklet to run javascript that would change a the current
> webpage(add some kind of overlay or iframe) and allow some cross
> domain scripting. I found the easyXDM library, that seems like it
> should be helpful. the site http://reframeit.com/ uses it with their
> product.
> Does anyone here have experience with this sort of thing?
>

Looking at their site to find their scripts, I see:-

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" lang="en-us"
xmlns:fb="http://www.facebook.com/2008/fbml">

Oh dear. XHTML transitional is a dead giveaway. Why would anyone use
(or pretend to use) XHTML transitional in 2010? I mean, what are they
transitioning from ten years after XHTML came out and a full five years
since it died? :)

The document is served as plain old (error filled) HTML, so the above is
just cargo cult nonsense. Not a good start.

Looking at the first script:-

(function(){var _jQuery=window.jQuery,_$=window.$;var
jQuery=window.jQuery=window. ...

Sorry, no. If you can describe exactly what it is you would like to do,
I am sure I can tell you how to do it sans jQuery gibberish.
From: Thomas Allen on 26 Mar 2010 13:48
On Mar 26, 11:51 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking at the first script:-
>
> (function(){var _jQuery=window.jQuery,_$=window.$;var
> jQuery=window.jQuery=window. ...
>
> Sorry, no.

Why is that?

Thomas

From: David Mark on 26 Mar 2010 14:20
Thomas Allen wrote:
> On Mar 26, 11:51 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Looking at the first script:-
>>
>> (function(){var _jQuery=window.jQuery,_$=window.$;var
>> jQuery=window.jQuery=window. ...
>>
>> Sorry, no.
>
> Why is that?
>

Elementary. I know what's in jQuery, which is highly suspect,
ever-shifting nonsense. Anything built atop such a faulty foundation
will be susceptible to shaking and eventually falling apart.
Furthermore, it speaks volumes about the judgment (or lack thereof) of
the developers. So no. Just no. ;)
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: My Library API Reference error
Next: How to control (disable/enable) all onclick events