On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Gusts Kaksis <email@example.com>
--I'm more than happy to share my experience with
issues. Others on this list know a lot about this as well. Some of
these I'm sure jQuery addresses; maybe some (like "a div
containing an applet may not ever be set to display:none") are
Removing the element or setting it to display=none will crash Java,
am I right?
Not exactly. MSIE reloads the applet, and you lose whatever state it is in.
--ChemDoodleWeb.js must not be adjusted -- or if it
is, that must be done in collaboration with Kevin Theissen (who is
probably reading this)
I think I'll go for JME first, which as much as I saw, does not have
a jQuery wrapper at all, but ChemDoodle is somewhere in between, so
it can stay as is for now. Only afterwards we'll need some wrapper
API (like Jmol is now). I just don't understand why it's still
called Jmol, if it's so much more than just Jmol, it should have
been named Online Chem Toolkit or something. :)
So I say there is no problems with writing simple HTML with
data attributes containing some hard core scripts. Maybe, if
you have some really nasty examples, that have strict
indenting and line breaks, that you could show me and I
could test them, then, please, show me them.
We just can't put scripts in HTML as tag attributes. Period.
Find some other way. Trust me on that one.
I'm still sceptical about that, I really need to do some proof of
concept testing, that it does not work, because it's thee data, that
HTML is all about.
I guess in this context that would become something like this:
<a data-script="load "my file.xyz"">my
so that helps some. But it is a real pain for page developers, and we've tried to avoid it as much as possible. Since it's easy enough to do, it seems to me it should at least be an option to replace that with something like:
and then allow definition of that script id as ' load "my file.xyz" '
As for quotes - always
escape them. If the site is running with some kinda CMS,
that can be done automatically in WYSIWYG, if the site is
prepared with some authoring tool, like, for example,
Dreamweaver, then it will also do it for you.
First of all, scripts could run hundreds of lines. Second, we
have tried escaping these, and besides being a royal pain,
mostly it hasn't worked. HTML tags and <param. values are
just not adequate for holders of scripts. It's totally
unnecessary anyway, I think. the solution has been around for
years, and we have had no problem with it. It seems to me you
will quickly find a different way. Perhaps the "data-script"
simply points to a key in an associative array that is created
in the head using an API, for example.
This still breaks the separation attempt. I know that it would be a
painfull, in case, if somebody would like to write HTML by hand, but
with authoring tools today it should not be that kind of pain
anymore, especially when HTML5 introduced special attributes for raw
and crazy data to be held inline.
Why do you say that? If the body code would just refer to a user-defined name, then that's equivalent to a script. They can then define the script in the head, prior to after attaching the other business to the link.
And so, innerHtml is not the same as document.write, for one, it
will allow you to fill a specific element from different location in
the source, where document.write on the other hand writes right in
the place from where it was called.
Q: Is jQuery XHTML compliant?
working with DOM, and if DOM has been initialized as XHTML then
innerHtml, just sends some kind of eval() to the browsers DOM
parser, where it turns into a DOM fragment, whereas it really does
not matter anymore weather it is XHTML or just plain old HTML.
I'm not finding support for that on the web. Depends on things like namespaces and, for example, whether data-xxxx is in a dictionary, I think.
In any case, no one wants to download a pdb file as last
resort. That's way too esoteric. (Anyone who could read that
file will not want it this way.) If the applet doesn't load,
the best solution is to provide an image. That's what
JmolApplet.js does, upon request.
I'd propose a different approach and throw in one more buzzword -
accessibility :) neither Flash nor Java is good with all the screen
readers for blind people, but they are not my main concern here. My
approach would be to show a static image in the placeholder in the
first place and then gradually replace it with Jmol applet
(instantly or with a mouse click). By the way, it's the approach http://www.pdb.org/
which, I must say, is really thought trough. I think it's called
degrading gracefully. And throwing in an option for file download if
Jmol could not be started is one of them.
in their browsers, I was visiting St. Petersburg two years ago and
this guy, I stayed with, told me that they are kind of paranoid
about the hacker scene there.
So for that to work, don't you have to hard-code into your page a <noscript> tag? I guess anyone could do that if they cared to now as well, with JmolApplet.js or with Jmol.js. I'm not seeing the difference between jQuery and not jQuery on that one. So we could recommend some sort of boilerplate for that, but that really isn't relevant to this discussion, is it?
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
Jmol-developers mailing list