Nabble - NYPHP SIG: Front End

Re: JavaScript - toggle visibility problem -- RESOLVED

2008-11-21T14:15:32Z

sometimes it is about being working 10 hours without resting, and that errors appear :)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Michael Southwell <michael.southwell@...> wrote:

Many of you will have seen my request on Talk for information about a JS list and a problem I was having. Just to clean up that loose end, the problem turned out to be an accidentally duplicated field name, so it was a matter of stupidity rather than JS ignorance (although I plead guilty to that as well ;-).

--
=================
Michael Southwell
Vice President, Education
NYPHP TRAINING: http://nyphp.com/Training/Indepth
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

JavaScript - toggle visibility problem -- RESOLVED

2008-11-21T08:58:50Z

Many of you will have seen my request on Talk for information about a JS
list and a problem I was having. Just to clean up that loose end, the
problem turned out to be an accidentally duplicated field name, so it
was a matter of stupidity rather than JS ignorance (although I plead
guilty to that as well ;-).

--
=================
Michael Southwell
Vice President, Education
NYPHP TRAINING: http://nyphp.com/Training/Indepth
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Freelance position: Frontend HTML developer needed

2008-11-12T08:38:17Z

Hello everyone,
We are looking for a frontend web developer who can create cross browser compatible pages (IE6, IE 7, and FireFox 2.0+). This is a temporary 2 weeks gig. The candidate MUST be able to hand code tableless W3C compliant HTML/CSS(no WSIWYG) pages and experienced in cutting web images in Photoshop on a PC. You will be given layered Phostoshop files and will have to code in HTML/CSS. Familirity with ASP .NET would be nice as you'll be working with server side templates, but no server side coding is expected from you.

MUST, must be able to work onsite in Manhattan (Chelsea). Pays $40/hr.

Expected engagement period: 11/18 - 12/2

Thanks for your time,
Hanan Mahmood
HananM@...

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: position: fixed in IE 7, 6

2008-10-02T09:44:59Z

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, csnyder <chsnyder@...> wrote:

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:04 PM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:
> Is there some secret trick one needs to know in order to persuade IE 7 to
> support position : fixed ?

Make sure IE is using strict mode for your pages, according to
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/position.html

Strict mode mitigates most IE7 css issues.

Aaaaaah. I was almost there but didn't know how to get the browser into Strict mode until I found http://www.quirksmode.org/css/quirksmode.html

Sorry about the double post.

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

Re: position: fixed in IE 7, 6

2008-10-02T09:08:23Z

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:04 PM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:
> Is there some secret trick one needs to know in order to persuade IE 7 to
> support position : fixed ?

Make sure IE is using strict mode for your pages, according to
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/position.html

Strict mode mitigates most IE7 css issues.
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

position: fixed in IE 7 ?

2008-10-02T09:05:49Z

Is there some secret trick one needs to know in order to get IE 7 to support position : fixed ? I have been reading around but still don't get it.

Gratefully,

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

position: fixed in IE 7, 6

2008-10-02T09:04:13Z

Is there some secret trick one needs to know in order to persuade IE 7 to support position : fixed ?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

Re: fun-duh-mental javascript, xhr and form submission

2008-09-26T07:06:12Z

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:50 AM, <dirn@...> wrote:

Try replacing return false; with Event.stop (e);

Aaaaah.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [front-end] fun-duh-mental javascript, xhr and form submission
From: "David Mintz" <david@...>
Date: Fri, September 26, 2008 9:48 am
To: front-end@...

Suppose you want a form to get submitted "normally" if the user has JS disabled, but as an xhr if the user has js enabled.

<form action="whatever" method="get" id="myForm">

<input type="submit" value="Submit"/>
</form>

In my experience, if you want to disable the form via javascript, you have to insert onsubmit="return false;" to the <form> tag. I have played with Prototype as follows

Event.observe('myForm', 'submit', function(e) { return false; }) ;

and found that it doesn't work. Logic tells me that it must be because the submit event has already taken place when the callback fires (duh). Why is it then that the onsubmit attrib inside the form tag does the trick?

--

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

RE: fun-duh-mental javascript, xhr and form submission

2008-09-26T06:50:03Z

Try replacing return false; with Event.stop (e);

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [front-end] fun-duh-mental javascript, xhr and form submission
From: "David Mintz" <david@...>
Date: Fri, September 26, 2008 9:48 am
To: front-end@...

Suppose you want a form to get submitted "normally" if the user has JS disabled, but as an xhr if the user has js enabled.

<form action="whatever" method="get" id="myForm">

<input type="submit" value="Submit"/>
</form>

In my experience, if you want to disable the form via javascript, you have to insert onsubmit="return false;" to the <form> tag. I have played with Prototype as follows

Event.observe('myForm', 'submit', function(e) { return false; }) ;

and found that it doesn't work. Logic tells me that it must be because the submit event has already taken place when the callback fires (duh). Why is it then that the onsubmit attrib inside the form tag does the trick?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

fun-duh-mental javascript, xhr and form submission

2008-09-26T06:48:23Z

Suppose you want a form to get submitted "normally" if the user has JS disabled, but as an xhr if the user has js enabled.

<form action="whatever" method="get" id="myForm">

<input type="submit" value="Submit"/>
</form>

In my experience, if you want to disable the form via javascript, you have to insert onsubmit="return false;" to the <form> tag. I have played with Prototype as follows

Event.observe('myForm', 'submit', function(e) { return false; }) ;

and found that it doesn't work. Logic tells me that it must be because the submit event has already taken place when the callback fires (duh). Why is it then that the onsubmit attrib inside the form tag does the trick?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

Re: PHP Email injection

2008-08-13T13:50:54Z

On Aug 13, 2008, at 7:28 AM, Mark Armendariz wrote:

Here's one of the best email patterns I've found, with a thorough explanation. It's by the Cal Henderson (the guy who wrote Flickr).

http://www.iamcal.com/publish/articles/php/parsing_email/

I believe Cal's function allows addresses with + signs:

somebody+nyphp@...

somebody+mysql@...

This is a convention that's nice for filters and stuff... but if you allow it, realize that you'll allow the same email account to be used multiple times which might not be desired depending on your app.

-Rob

Re: PHP Email injection

2008-08-13T04:27:39Z

Andrew Mercer wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to stop email injection by checking form fields etc before submit.

I am using

$fieldPattern = '/^[a-z0-9()\/\'":\*+|,.; \- %21?&#$@...;

if (!preg_match($fieldPattern, $name)){

$error = 'Please review the name you entered. In contains invalid characters.';

}

However this rejects names that have white space between names.

I have tried changing the pattern without success - any ideas.

Is there a site to explain/describe what the pattern?

Here's one of the best email patterns I've found, with a thorough explanation. It's by the Cal Henderson (the guy who wrote Flickr).

http://www.iamcal.com/publish/articles/php/parsing_email/

Mark

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

PHP Email injection

2008-08-13T04:06:39Z

Hi,

I am trying to stop email injection by checking form fields etc before submit.

I am using

$fieldPattern = '/^[a-z0-9()\/\'":\*+|,.; \- !?&#$@...;

if (!preg_match($fieldPattern, $name)){

$error = 'Please review the name you entered. In contains invalid characters.';

}

However this rejects names that have white space between names.

I have tried changing the pattern without success - any ideas.

Is there a site to explain/describe what the pattern?

Thanks for any help

Andrew

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-04T10:39:51Z

+1 for jQuery. In terms of IE6 support... the core of jQuery works
just fine, it's just that you need plugins to do a lot of the bells-
and-whistles - so then it's up to the creator of the plugin to write
something that works cross-browser. As this thread has touched upon,
it's often the css and not the javascript that isn't working
correctly. jQuery has a pretty good community to catch those things
though. It's popularity has made it feel like it's sprawling a bit in
terms of the number of plugins which seem a little overwhelming.

I've also used YUI for a few things... I like their autocomplete
library... it might be a touch too heavy. I haven't heard any
complaints about it in IE6 though. They have a WYSIWIG editor that
seems promising. I haven't taken the time to try switching to it from
TinyMCE though.

For those of you looking for some stuff to help with cross-browser css
development, here are some frameworks/libraries/starting points:

http://www.contentwithstyle.co.uk/Articles/17/
http://code.google.com/p/css-boilerplate/
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/reset/
http://code.google.com/p/blueprintcss/
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/grids/

We've been using a modified version of the ContentWithStyle
framework. I kinda like the Boilerplate one as well. Blueprint and Y!
Grids seem to have a lot more going on and maybe would only be needed
if you have a complicated portal or a site that needs to resemble a
print publication.

-Rob

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-02T15:04:10Z

I tend to follow the Yahoo! browser grades for prioritizing browser support efforts --

http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/

seems to line up with my intuitive sense of browser usage based on sites I've helped run.

On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Hans Kaspersetz <hans@...> wrote:

It's funny, but Prototype showed me that Javascript is a really
excellent, graceful language. JQuery, even more so. I think the main
point of the frameworks is that JS doesn't _have_ to suck, provided
you smooth over the differences in DOM implementation between various
browsers.

I have much more trouble with cross-browser CSS than I do with
cross-browser Javascript.

Chris, I think I was being a little harsh yesterday. When I get stuck in front-end land, I lump it all together, and the frustration just gushes. The libraries do smooth over a lot of the cross browser issues and do enable us to do some really cool things without that much work. I am just not married to one of the other.

> CSS incompatibility seems rears its ugly head even worse on content management frameworks like Joomla, especially those using "table-less" > templates. I've run across some fairly high profile sites that render horrendously on non-IE browsers.

Rolan, I think the amazing part about this is that I have actually had business owners/managers (customers) chastise me for dedicating budget to cross browser CSS compatibility. They ignorantly said, "Well, Firefox is only like less then 20% of the market and I am just targeting people in internet cafes, why should I spend money on making the site work for them. Lets get it to work on IE and move on." When I argued the market is larger, it was an import market segment that was growing, and showed them the stats they ignored the information and asked moved on.
It is a matter of pride of workmanship and quality control that we make our best effort to make things work across the major browsers. However, sometimes people just don't see the value and don't want to pay for it. It is unfortunate and strategically a bad decision. As the NON-IE market continues to grow, eventually they will have to go back and make the investment.

I just checked the stats for a site I work on. And here are the results:

Total Traffic for July: 689,000 Unique Visitors

Traffic by Browser:

IE7 - 24.9%
IE6 - 17.4%
FireFox - 47.1%
Safari - 6.4%
Others - 4.2%

I broke out IE6 and IE7 because they are virtually different browsers when doing CSS development. I know this site isn't really reflective of the general market, they are in a forward looking niche. So the numbers are skewed towards FireFox. However, can you imagine creating a poor user experience for 324,519 visitors or almost half your traffic? Seems like a lot of lost revenue to me.

As a comparison, I just checked the stats for Cyber X Designs' web site. We have a substantially smaller traffic volume, however, we target SMB's. So I estimate our traffic is a bit more representative of the distribution on the net.

Traffic by Browser:
IE7 - 31.7%
IE6 - 29.8%
FireFox - 35.3%
Others- 3.2%

Based on those numbers, it is as compelling to test on IE6 and it is on Firefox.

It is true the bulk of the front-end time is spent on getting things to look consistent amongst the big three. What a headache our friends at Microsoft have created and will continue to grow with IE8. Three browser VESIONS and three different implementations. That is the biggest WTF of all. Talk about a thread hi-jack.

Hans Kaspersetz
http://www.cyberxdesigns.com

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-02T08:10:05Z

> It's funny, but Prototype showed me that Javascript is a really
> excellent, graceful language. JQuery, even more so. I think the main
> point of the frameworks is that JS doesn't _have_ to suck, provided
> you smooth over the differences in DOM implementation between various
> browsers.
>
> I have much more trouble with cross-browser CSS than I do with
> cross-browser Javascript.
>
>

Chris, I think I was being a little harsh yesterday. When I get stuck
in front-end land, I lump it all together, and the frustration just
gushes. The libraries do smooth over a lot of the cross browser issues
and do enable us to do some really cool things without that much work.
I am just not married to one of the other.

> CSS incompatibility seems rears its ugly head even worse on content
management frameworks like Joomla, especially those using "table-less" >
templates. I've run across some fairly high profile sites that render
horrendously on non-IE browsers.

Rolan, I think the amazing part about this is that I have actually had
business owners/managers (customers) chastise me for dedicating budget
to cross browser CSS compatibility. They ignorantly said, "Well,
Firefox is only like less then 20% of the market and I am just targeting
people in internet cafes, why should I spend money on making the site
work for them. Lets get it to work on IE and move on." When I argued
the market is larger, it was an import market segment that was growing,
and showed them the stats they ignored the information and asked moved on.

It is a matter of pride of workmanship and quality control that we make
our best effort to make things work across the major browsers. However,
sometimes people just don't see the value and don't want to pay for it.
It is unfortunate and strategically a bad decision. As the NON-IE
market continues to grow, eventually they will have to go back and make
the investment.

I just checked the stats for a site I work on. And here are the results:

Total Traffic for July: 689,000 Unique Visitors

Traffic by Browser:

IE7 - 24.9%
IE6 - 17.4%
FireFox - 47.1%
Safari - 6.4%
Others - 4.2%

I broke out IE6 and IE7 because they are virtually different browsers
when doing CSS development. I know this site isn't really reflective of
the general market, they are in a forward looking niche. So the numbers
are skewed towards FireFox. However, can you imagine creating a poor
user experience for 324,519 visitors or almost half your traffic? Seems
like a lot of lost revenue to me.

As a comparison, I just checked the stats for Cyber X Designs' web
site. We have a substantially smaller traffic volume, however, we
target SMB's. So I estimate our traffic is a bit more representative of
the distribution on the net.

Traffic by Browser:
IE7 - 31.7%
IE6 - 29.8%
FireFox - 35.3%
Others- 3.2%

Based on those numbers, it is as compelling to test on IE6 and it is
on Firefox.

It is true the bulk of the front-end time is spent on getting things to
look consistent amongst the big three. What a headache our friends at
Microsoft have created and will continue to grow with IE8. Three
browser VESIONS and three different implementations. That is the
biggest WTF of all. Talk about a thread hi-jack.

Hans Kaspersetz
http://www.cyberxdesigns.com

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-02T06:10:32Z

csnyder wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Hans Kaspersetz <hans@...> wrote:
>
>
> browsers.
>
> I have much more trouble with cross-browser CSS than I do with
> cross-browser Javascript.
>
> Chris Snyder
> http://chxor.chxo.com/
>
>

So true, so true. CSS incompatibility seems rears its ugly head even
worse on content management frameworks like Joomla, especially those
using "table-less" templates. I've run across some fairly high profile
sites that render horrendously on non-IE browsers. Elements way off
position, content leaking out of boxes, etc. Not sure if the site
managers are oblivious to the state of things or just find it just too
ugly and tedious to fix. There's appears to be a need for a
cross-browser CSS generator. A google search for "cross browser css
library" returns a few links to the Yahoo UI library, but little else.

~Rolan
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T15:25:01Z

csnyder wrote:

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Hans Kaspersetz hans@... wrote:

I agree they all suck.  But then again, how could they not suck, they are
built on something that really sucks.  Every browser handles things
differently and JavaScript just kinda sucks.  I guess when they fix the
foundation the tools will become something I could love.


It's funny, but Prototype showed me that Javascript is a really
excellent, graceful language. JQuery, even more so. I think the main
point of the frameworks is that JS doesn't _have_ to suck, provided
you smooth over the differences in DOM implementation between various
browsers.

I have much more trouble with cross-browser CSS than I do with
cross-browser Javascript.

We're in violent agreement. JS is actually a very interesting and powerful language. The browser implementations are pretty painful - which is why one might essentially require one of these libraries, but otherwise the language itself is amazing. I've written a few rather large JS-based applications that have been powerful and useful for my clients that worked in every browser with little effort (even sometimes without external libs).

Now, complex, cross-browser CSS on the other hand... Drives me completely batty.

Mark
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T15:18:35Z

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Hans Kaspersetz <hans@...> wrote:

> I agree they all suck. But then again, how could they not suck, they are
> built on something that really sucks. Every browser handles things
> differently and JavaScript just kinda sucks. I guess when they fix the
> foundation the tools will become something I could love.

It's funny, but Prototype showed me that Javascript is a really
excellent, graceful language. JQuery, even more so. I think the main
point of the frameworks is that JS doesn't _have_ to suck, provided
you smooth over the differences in DOM implementation between various
browsers.

I have much more trouble with cross-browser CSS than I do with
cross-browser Javascript.

Chris Snyder
http://chxor.chxo.com/
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T13:42:05Z

David Mintz wrote:
> We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC
> frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS frameworks
> like Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?
>
Well, we have used Prototype and JQuery. JQuery is the flavor of the
month for us now. Why? John Andrews told me to. Really, John
suggested I add some effects to a blog I am writing, told me I should do
it with JQuery and that was that. I guess when you are that loosely wed
to a tool you aren't going to get a significant response.

I agree they all suck. But then again, how could they not suck, they
are built on something that really sucks. Every browser handles things
differently and JavaScript just kinda sucks. I guess when they fix the
foundation the tools will become something I could love.

I might just be jaded. I have spent the last 3 days doing CSS and
JavaScript stuff and have been battling the Firefox/IE6/IE7 beast. An
ugly beast it is! We are doing some really cool things for our clients,
but damn it just eats up the hours and patience.

Hans Kaspersetz
http://www.cyberxdesigns.com
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T13:12:40Z

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:
> We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC
> frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS frameworks like
> Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?

Tried Dojo, then Prototype+Scriptaculous, finally settled on MochiKit
as being just enough to make javascript suck less, without getting in
the way. It's been stable and well documented for a relatively long
time.

Most of what I'm doing falls under the category of stupid DHTML
tricks, though. For the most part I just use MochiKit's connect() and
signal() to handle events, and its implementation of the $() function.

On a tangental note, I'm waiting for someone to write the framework
that creates the "last mile" for Google Gears apps -- an object that
handles the creation and syncing of a local database with one or more
servers, and silently handles transition between online and offline
states. Has anyone seen that in their framework of choice?

Chris Snyder
http://chxor.chxo.com/
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T08:13:59Z

I think one of the reasons this hasn't started a 'religious' war is I personally don't think any of them are that great. They're all decent, and they all do what they're supposed to do (abstract browser differences and make coding easier on the developer).

In addition, they're all remarkably similar, so going from jQuery to Prototype or the other way around isn't that big of a deal, whereas changing something like PHP frameworks is a big deal.

This could be purely speculative as well, but I feel as PHP developers (among many many other types of developers) we know that nothing from the client side can be trusted. This tends to lead (at least me) to doing very simple things with js libraries, to make the user's experience a bit more fluid, but nothing groundbreaking.

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 11:05 AM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Mark Armendariz <lists@...> wrote:

    Doesn't cloud up the document scope.
    Sits quietly in its own namespace or whatever namespace you choose for it.


Very interesting and oh so important.

And I am suspecting that the IE6 problem that has been dogging me arises from inter-script interference of some sort, because when I really really isolate the problem down to this:

        davidmintz.org/eg/autocompleter.php

then it works (almost) faultlessly in IE6. Same code in the context of a page with a fair amount of other stuff going on, weird misbehavior.

But if you have basically one lib that does damn near everything you need, and possibly a lightweight plugin or two à la JQuery... less chance of interference, you would think.

Web 2.0 can be a real PITA. I long for the days when cgi-lib.pl ruled (that's a joke).

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

--
Brian O'Connor

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T08:05:26Z

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Mark Armendariz <lists@...> wrote:

    Doesn't cloud up the document scope.
    Sits quietly in its own namespace or whatever namespace you choose for it.

Very interesting and oh so important.

And I am suspecting that the IE6 problem that has been dogging me arises from inter-script interference of some sort, because when I really really isolate the problem down to this:

davidmintz.org/eg/autocompleter.php

then it works (almost) faultlessly in IE6. Same code in the context of a page with a fair amount of other stuff going on, weird misbehavior.

But if you have basically one lib that does damn near everything you need, and possibly a lightweight plugin or two à la JQuery... less chance of interference, you would think.

Web 2.0 can be a real PITA. I long for the days when cgi-lib.pl ruled (that's a joke).

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T07:47:43Z

I'd like to know which is best at supporting old browsers, IE6 in particular.

@Brian The Prototype API is indeed sweet but I bet I could learn to love JQuery's

@Hanan Both JQuery and Prototype encourage chaining, which can indeed be really cool for writing one-line rhapsodies -- but if you get too carried away that coding style can get insane.

I did like it that JQuery seemed intermediate-programmer-friendly, as a semi-dilettante I like that attitude.

Dojo looks like a killer.

Anyway -- looks like as usual, all the big players are good, and which is best for you? It depends.

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-08-01T06:07:45Z

I've used Prototype for a few projects. Works really well for oop-style javascript and I thought it was pretty powerful. YUI and Dojo seem really interesting and I've been following them for a while, but they've always seemed like large investments. From my understanding, there's no pick and choose with them. You're using the whole library no matter what.

My personal favorite for the past year or so has been jQuery.
    Fast and easy to include / set up.
    Relatively easy to extend - with some solid community driven extensions.
    Solid documentation.
    Doesn't cloud up the document scope.
    Sits quietly in its own namespace or whatever namespace you choose for it.
    And I'm a fan of John Resig. He seems like a solid and knowledgeable developer with lots of interest in bettering the javascript community.

Mark

Hanan wrote:

I'm not incredibly religious either but JQuery is my favorite. It's easy to invoke, you can chain multiple effects and thus far fewer lines of code. It was missing the super fancy interface plugins like Mootools but now there's an excellent UI plugin http://ui.jquery.com

I've found it to be verstile enough to work for both beginner and experts.

-Hanan

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Marc Antony Vose <suzerain@...> wrote:

Well, you didn't mention it, probably for good reason (i.e., you don't like it), but I'm using YUI. I'm not incredibly religious about it, or anything; it just seemed to be under active development, and well supported, so when I needed to integrate JS tools into my pub framework, that's what I settled on.

I know it's not the lightest, but it is pretty well done; haven't run into any browser issues yet, as long as I use it the way they intend, and stay away from the beta classes, and so forth.

Previously I was using a bunch of different little libs, but I'm happy to have standardized on one.

Marc Vose
Suzerain Studios
http://www.suzerain.com

Le 1 août 08 à 06:43, Brian O'Connor a écrit :

I use Prototype, but that's what I started with. I looked at jQuery and I just didn't feel that the syntax felt natural enough, but that's a very arbitrary statement.

When I looked at dojo what I thought was rather neat was they had some code in place inside the testing libraries (forget what they're called offhand) that supposedly worked with comet, which as far as I know none of the other libraries have.

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:
We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS frameworks like Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?

I have been using Prototype and Scriptaculous, and the Dynarch thing for a date picker (http://www.dynarch.com/projects/calendar/), and Prototip (), and home-rolled stuff for various purposes. Things are working in FF and failing in inexplicable ways when I run them in IE -- too much. I am wondering if JQuery might (1) support backward browsers better and (2) be a little slimmer -- accomplish all that Ajax, eye-candy, date-picker etc with fewer libs ergo less chance for interference.

Thoughts?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

--
Brian O'Connor
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-07-31T19:06:11Z

I'm not incredibly religious either but JQuery is my favorite. It's easy to invoke, you can chain multiple effects and thus far fewer lines of code. It was missing the super fancy interface plugins like Mootools but now there's an excellent UI plugin http://ui.jquery.com

I've found it to be verstile enough to work for both beginner and experts.

-Hanan

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Marc Antony Vose <suzerain@...> wrote:

Well, you didn't mention it, probably for good reason (i.e., you don't like it), but I'm using YUI. I'm not incredibly religious about it, or anything; it just seemed to be under active development, and well supported, so when I needed to integrate JS tools into my pub framework, that's what I settled on.

I know it's not the lightest, but it is pretty well done; haven't run into any browser issues yet, as long as I use it the way they intend, and stay away from the beta classes, and so forth.

Previously I was using a bunch of different little libs, but I'm happy to have standardized on one.

Marc Vose
Suzerain Studios
http://www.suzerain.com

Le 1 août 08 à 06:43, Brian O'Connor a écrit :

I use Prototype, but that's what I started with. I looked at jQuery and I just didn't feel that the syntax felt natural enough, but that's a very arbitrary statement.

When I looked at dojo what I thought was rather neat was they had some code in place inside the testing libraries (forget what they're called offhand) that supposedly worked with comet, which as far as I know none of the other libraries have.

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:
We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS frameworks like Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?

I have been using Prototype and Scriptaculous, and the Dynarch thing for a date picker (http://www.dynarch.com/projects/calendar/), and Prototip (), and home-rolled stuff for various purposes. Things are working in FF and failing in inexplicable ways when I run them in IE -- too much. I am wondering if JQuery might (1) support backward browsers better and (2) be a little slimmer -- accomplish all that Ajax, eye-candy, date-picker etc with fewer libs ergo less chance for interference.

Thoughts?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

--
Brian O'Connor
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-07-31T17:31:05Z

Well, you didn't mention it, probably for good reason (i.e., you don't
like it), but I'm using YUI. I'm not incredibly religious about it,
or anything; it just seemed to be under active development, and well
supported, so when I needed to integrate JS tools into my pub
framework, that's what I settled on.

I know it's not the lightest, but it is pretty well done; haven't run
into any browser issues yet, as long as I use it the way they intend,
and stay away from the beta classes, and so forth.

Previously I was using a bunch of different little libs, but I'm happy
to have standardized on one.

Marc Vose
Suzerain Studios
http://www.suzerain.com

Le 1 août 08 à 06:43, Brian O'Connor a écrit :

> I use Prototype, but that's what I started with. I looked at jQuery
> and I just didn't feel that the syntax felt natural enough, but
> that's a very arbitrary statement.
>
> When I looked at dojo what I thought was rather neat was they had
> some code in place inside the testing libraries (forget what they're
> called offhand) that supposedly worked with comet, which as far as I
> know none of the other libraries have.
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David Mintz <david@...>
> wrote:
> We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC
> frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS
> frameworks like Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?
>
> I have been using Prototype and Scriptaculous, and the Dynarch thing
> for a date picker (http://www.dynarch.com/projects/calendar/), and
> Prototip (), and home-rolled stuff for various purposes. Things are
> working in FF and failing in inexplicable ways when I run them in IE
> -- too much. I am wondering if JQuery might (1) support backward
> browsers better and (2) be a little slimmer -- accomplish all that
> Ajax, eye-candy, date-picker etc with fewer libs ergo less chance
> for interference.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> David Mintz
> http://davidmintz.org/
>
> The subtle source is clear and bright
> The tributary streams flow through the darkness
>
> _______________________________________________
> New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
> AMP Technology
> Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
> http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
> http://www.nyphp.org
>
>
>
> --
> Brian O'Connor
> _______________________________________________
> New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
> AMP Technology
> Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
> http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
> http://www.nyphp.org

Re: let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-07-31T15:43:37Z

I use Prototype, but that's what I started with. I looked at jQuery and I just didn't feel that the syntax felt natural enough, but that's a very arbitrary statement.

When I looked at dojo what I thought was rather neat was they had some code in place inside the testing libraries (forget what they're called offhand) that supposedly worked with comet, which as far as I know none of the other libraries have.

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David Mintz <david@...> wrote:

We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS frameworks like Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?

I have been using Prototype and Scriptaculous, and the Dynarch thing for a date picker (http://www.dynarch.com/projects/calendar/), and Prototip (), and home-rolled stuff for various purposes. Things are working in FF and failing in inexplicable ways when I run them in IE -- too much. I am wondering if JQuery might (1) support backward browsers better and (2) be a little slimmer -- accomplish all that Ajax, eye-candy, date-picker etc with fewer libs ergo less chance for interference.

Thoughts?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

--
Brian O'Connor

let's have a religious debate on JS frameworks

2008-07-31T13:42:11Z

We do it from time to time with code editors, WYSWYG editors, MVC frameworks, I think we're due for a religious debate on JS frameworks like Dojo, Prototype, JQuery. What faith are you, and why?

I have been using Prototype and Scriptaculous, and the Dynarch thing for a date picker (http://www.dynarch.com/projects/calendar/), and Prototip (), and home-rolled stuff for various purposes. Things are working in FF and failing in inexplicable ways when I run them in IE -- too much. I am wondering if JQuery might (1) support backward browsers better and (2) be a little slimmer -- accomplish all that Ajax, eye-candy, date-picker etc with fewer libs ergo less chance for interference.

Thoughts?

--
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

The subtle source is clear and bright
The tributary streams flow through the darkness

Scour.com invite from Joseph Crawford

2008-07-24T06:24:49Z

Hey,

Did you hear about Scour? It is the next gen search engine with Google/Yahoo/MSN results and user comments all on one page. Best of all we get paid for using it by earning points with every search, comment and vote. The points are redeemable for Visa gift cards! It's like earning credit card or airline points just for searching! Hit the link below to join for free and we will both get points!

http://scour.com/invite/jcrawford/

I know you'll like it!

- Joseph Crawford
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: Video Hosting Providers?

2008-07-12T09:00:14Z

On Jul 10, 2008, at 1:21 PM, Hans Kaspersetz wrote:
> What I was wondering is, who are you using to host and deliver your
> video for members only? The customer is looking for something as
> easy as youtube. We want to be able to display the video on their
> site, like a youtube video, and control access.

Check out Vimeo.com. They claim to "have robust privacy controls so
you can choose exactly who views your videos, and you can even post
videos on other sites like Facebook, MySpace, Flickr, or Digg."

Vimeo also supports 720p HD content which is nice. I've used it a
couple times but I haven't tried out the privacy controls. It seems
like it could be a good fit for you though.

_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: Video Hosting Providers?

2008-07-10T13:10:20Z

>
> Seriously, though, t's not that difficult to encode the video to flv
> format and use a player like FlowPlayer to display it.
> http://flowplayer.org/
>
> Why use a third party, if you are the one who can control access?
> _______________________________________________
>
>

Greet suggestion. I am not hooked on a third-party. I thought is might
be nice to have a nifty interface and someone else's bandwidth. I will
check out Flowplayer and let you know how it turns out!

Hans K
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Re: Video Hosting Providers?

2008-07-10T11:50:11Z

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Hans Kaspersetz <hans@...> wrote:
> We want to be able to display the video on their site, like a youtube
> video, and control access.
>
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
> Hans K

I don't suppose YouTube videos with random or fake names would
work...? Call them all "Rick Roll #26" or something, and no one will
actually watch it on YT.

Seriously, though, t's not that difficult to encode the video to flv
format and use a player like FlowPlayer to display it.
http://flowplayer.org/

Why use a third party, if you are the one who can control access?
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Video Hosting Providers?

2008-07-10T10:21:02Z

I have a client who is a small community organization, kind of like
NYPHP, who would like to record their meetings and then make an edited
version of the video available to members of the group. They already
have a members only web site built with Joomla.

What I was wondering is, who are you using to host and deliver your
video for members only? The customer is looking for something as easy
as youtube. We want to be able to display the video on their site, like
a youtube video, and control access.

Any guidance would be appreciated.

Hans K
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org

Passpack library release

2008-07-09T09:23:58Z

The folks at Passpack have released a nice bundle of javascript
encryption and hash algorithms, to make it easy to perform client-side
encryption/decryption.
http://code.google.com/p/passpack/

Why would you do this? To prevent storage of sensitive data (passwords
and the like) on shared hosts. By performing encryption/decryption in
the client, the host has no knowledge of the values being stored. One
hopes the user doesn't lose their decryption password, of course.

Most of the components of the library were already available, but this
release bundles them into one convenient object, with documentation
and an example app.

Chris Snyder
http://chxor.chxo.com/
_______________________________________________
New York PHP SIG: Front End Mailing List
AMP Technology
Supporting Apache, MySQL and PHP
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/front-end
http://www.nyphp.org