[thelist] xml in javascript ie does show it

Jeff Howden jeff at jeffhowden.com
Wed Oct 26 16:22:05 CDT 2005


Hi,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: gruppenfreizeit
>       [mailto:postmeister at gruppenfreizeit.com] 
> 
> > The TBODY element is *not* a useless element.  It has 
> > semantic significance.  Whether or not you like the
> > extra step isn't important.  What matters is that IE
> > gets this correct and Mozilla does not.
> 
> That's not true. It's a fact: Mozilla is that gratefull
> and supports both.  And I tried the tbody elment to
> style another table.  It's really useless.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

It's *not* useless.  The spec () *requires* it.  Just admit you're both
wrong and completely lacking the appropriate knowledge necessary to defend
your position.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > > el.setAttribute("style"
> > >                , "color:black;paddingRight:5px;...")
> > >
> > > instead of
> > > 
> > > el.style.color="black"
> > > el.style.paddingRight="5px"
> > 
> > Yes, I see.  However, I personally prefer the second
> > method as it's much more clear what's going on.
> 
> I don't get it. It's a lot more typing and the first
> method is clear.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

Actually, anybody will tell you that the second method is more clear as
individual properties and their values are broken out onto separate lines.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> But as I've written above:
> It's a fact: Mozilla is that gratefull and supports
> both.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

Agreed, Mozilla has one up on IE in that regard.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> var win=window.open(url,"win"+x, "dependent=yes,...
> That's truely enough for Mozilla.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

That is a non-standard extension to ECMAScript.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> x.createElement("INPUT");
> x.setAttribute("TYPE","checkbox");
> 
> It's simple and intuitiv to programm with Mozilla.
> IE returns a text input.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

Yes, another bug with IE.  However, it's avoidable and more readable.

x.createElement('INPUT');
x.type = 'checkbox';

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> In my opion Mozilla is real better for
> programming. [...]
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

It's purely a matter of opinion.  There are a myriad of things one can code
easily and intuitively in IE that require lots of complicated code, not to
mention the *huge* difference in reference material available.

With less than 10% marketshare it really doesn't matter though, now does it?

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> [...] If they would present a better 3d design, everyone
> will change. [...]
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

You *really* have no clue why IE has marketshare and Mozilla does not.  The
average user does *not* care about 3d design, open source zealotry, or "the
browser wars".  All they care about is getting access to information.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> [...] That's the big advantage of IE.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

No, the big advantage is that it's already installed on every machine sold
with Windows.

 [>] Jeff Howden
     jeff at jeffhowden.com
     http://jeffhowden.com/




More information about the thelist mailing list