Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Javascript > Roundup of FAQ change requests

Reply
Thread Tools

Roundup of FAQ change requests

 
 
Richard Cornford
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-06-2004
For the last couple of months I have been trying to get the next round
of updates to the FAQ underway and been being thwarted by a heavy
workload (the project I am working on has to be finished an QA tested
for a new year release. I don't think that going to prove practical, but
there is no harm in trying and some serious family commitments. But
it has to be done soon so this is stage one.

Mike Winter provided an extensive list of suggestions for grammar
changes for the FAQ, most of which I have incorporated in the next
version (so the text has changed a lot in some places. The results of
those changes are temporarily at:-

<URL: http://www.litotes.demon.co.uk/js_in...8_1_Draft.html >

The latest version of the notes is at:-

<URL: http://www.litotes.demon.co.uk/js_in...faq_notes.html >

(lots of minor corrections but only one significant new page (three more
are under construction but I am unlikely to finish more than one of them
before the next versions is published on jibbering.com).

I have been trying to respond to all of the FAQ change requests listed
below but I haven't had time to finish (and I must sleep now). I will
try to comment on/respond to the remaining items during the week.

As usual comments, feed-back, corrections, additional requests and
suggestions are welcome. (additional request are most likely to be acted
upon if they are fairly concrete, particularly in terms of proposed
wording and tested script examples).



<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4057818b.357791577%40news.individual.n et"
From="Jim Ley"
Subject="Re: Why JavaScript doesn't have sleep?!!"
Date="2004-03-16 14:40:33 PST">

>The Subject says its all.
>Most of computer languages and script
>languages have sleep function, except JavaScript.


An event driven programming paradigm is ideal for User Interfaces,
since the web is basically a user interface (in that it's something a
user interacts wth and not just performs calculations) then the most
logical paradigm is the event driven one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event-driven_programming

(might be worth a <FAQ**TRY> )
</QUOTE>

I have made some changes to the text of Quick answer 4.20 to
(at least partly) address this, and added the wikipedia link
to its MOREINFO section.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1tbhnwAmJ0oBFwai%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: How to verify an email address"
Date="2004-11-23 10:29:47 PST">


ISTM that it would be good to have an entry on RegExps for
validation. Is the FAQ still being updated?
</QUOTE>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=FWU9c.93%24B_1.37%40newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net"
From="Andrew Urquhart"
Subject="Re: focus and select"
Date="2004-03-29 04:50:52 PST">

.... . You could try:
http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-date4.htm#VID although I'm surprised to
see that there isn't a dedicated <FAQ**TRY> on validating dates.
</QUOTE>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=OQm%244fAa5JqAFwbN%40merlyn.demon.co.u k"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: javascript to display current date (and back dates)"
Date="2004-05-17 10:39:10 PST">


function LZ(x) { return (x<0||x>=10?"":"0") + x }
<snip>

IMHO, typing would be saved if LZ were in the FAQ.

</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MrPPmFAC9yVBFwVm%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Appending Date/Time Stamp to filename"
Date="2004-09-26 15:23:03 PST">

For leading zeroes AND separators, use <FAQ**TRY>

function LZ(x) { return (x<0||x>=10?"":"0") + x }

</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=yekQbjBjaXWBFw4%24%40merlyn.demon.co.u k"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: adding 2 times together"
Date="2004-09-28 10:09:31 PST">

Optimal LZ function needed!
</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=40AB8B2B.4F31C60E%40nospam.com"
From="Julie"
Subject="Re: comp.lang.javascript FAQ - META - 8.0 - 2004-03-15"
Date="2004-05-19 09:28:28 PST">

> | CHARTER: comp.lang.javascript
> |
> | The proposed comp.lang.javascript will be open to discussion on all
> | aspects of JavaScript, as it relates to HTML, Java, Perl, the World
> | Wide Web in general, and other related languages. The scope of
> | discussion will specifically exclude matters which are *solely*
> | related to Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s Java language, which should be
> | discussed in comp.lang.java.
> |
> | END CHARTER.

<snip>
Including the specific verbiage of the charter in the FAQ seems to me would be
appropriate. After all, it is the charter that drives the newsgroup (and
eventually appendices like the FAQ), not the other way around.
</QUOTE>

I don't see the charter as having much practical value, but opinion
at the time seemed to be that it should be included so I have made
a page for the notes reproducing the final CFV that included the
charter and linked to it from section 2.2.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=FjbNkcBpiKrAFwAd%40merlyn.demon.co.uk
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: form validation"
Date="2004-05-20 10:16:04 PST">

<snip>
The routine in FAQ 4.6 uses the proper arithmetic.

Note : it was written on the presumption that, since M & N are numbers
of places, generally supplied as literals, they would be positive. The
case of M<=0 is equivalent to that of M=0, and may give a deprecated
format; N=0 gives a deprecated but tolerable format, and N<0 gives a
wrong value.


<FAQ**TRY> in 4.6, after "successfully", insert ", for M>0, N>0" - or
such other adjustment as appeals.</FAQ**TRY>
</QUOTE>

Done.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=%24P%2BD%24dFrYHuAFw8V%40merlyn.demon. co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: Body hidden, but table borders still visible."
Date="2004-05-29 07:28:50 PST">

<snip>
Edition 1 of the Pocket Flanagan has "return", just where and as it
should be. Admittedly it is not indexed; but there is no index in the
Pocket. I presume, therefore, that "return" can readily be found in the
full Flanagan. The present edition is the 4th; the 3rd was 790 pages.

<FAQ**TRY> Add book pagecounts? Pocket 1st Edn is ~ 96pp.
</FAQ**TRY>

</QUOTE>

I don't see the number of pages in a book as having much relevance to
the value of that book, but I will include the information if there is
support for the idea (and someone tells me the page counts for the
editions that the FAQ does recommend.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=cal0p102982%40news1.newsguy.com"
From="Matt Kruse"
Subject="Re: open.window reloads parent window"
Date="2004-06-14 13:50:17 PST">
<snip>
So in your situation, you would want to do:
<a href="#" onClick="window.open(...);return false;">

That way, the onClick will always return false no matter what, and the "#"
href will never be navigated to.

Now, an important note:
Using "#" as your href url can be misleading, because it will simply cause a
reload in many browsers. Also, for users without js enabled, it will do
nothing and give no useful information. A better way to do it is
<a href="/note_about_javascript_being_required.html" onClick="...;return
false;">
That way, non-js users will at least be taken to a page which informs them
of why the link didn't work as expected.

<FAQ**TRY> because I expected to see this covered in more detail in the FAQ
but it wasn't... such a common problem should be addressed a little better
in the FAQ, IMO.
</FAQ**TRY>
</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=lZZlKwCA5gzAFwH2%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: desperate need for help with browser settings"
Date="2004-06-14 15:34:33 PST">

<snip>
He suggested changing URIs all the time; if you to read the FAQ, cited
in his signature & posted here today, searching for the word URI, you
would find the information that you need, which is not the information
that you want.

<FAQ**TRY>

In that section, s/date/time/, s/of/or/ #2.

Perhaps it should be "URI used to request the page", rather than "URI of
the page".

</FAQ**TRY>
</QUOTE>

Done, at least for date/time, 'of' was removed by Mike's suggested
grammar changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=McI%24bcEd701AFwyb%40merlyn.demon.co.u k"
From="Dr John Stockton ((E-Mail Removed))"
Subject="Re: <DIV>tag in netscape? but works in IE (see code)"
Date="2004-06-21 16:10:19 PST">

In section 4.22, "between" should be "in the range" or
similar. Between 1 & 3 there is only 2.

</QUOTE>

Done.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=8kKz1AEDMsABFw7e%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: HTML or Javascript or PHP solution: Textarea with Dynamic Width"
Date="2004-07-24 15:26:46 PST">
<snip>
<FAQ**TRY> Don't post merely to criticise spelling.

INFO: While this is not an HTML group, javascript can write HTML. The
combination of all three of MSIE4, dates YYYY-MM-DD, and justification
can lead to undesirable character spacing. YYYY/MM/DD is OK.
</FAQ**TRY>
</QUOTE>

I don't want to do this. It probably goes without saying that
criticising spelling is a bit of a waste of time, but I also enjoy
the irony of the unfortunate truth that any post gratuitously
criticising spelling will include at least one spelling mistake,
typo or obvious grammar flaw and so only serve to make its originator
appear ridiculous.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4000378.estkDNKM41%40PointedEars.de"
From="Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"
Subject="Re: String replace alternative"
Date="2004-08-06 16:14:41 PST">
<snip>
Please do not write attribution novels, see
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
as referred to by the FAQ of this newsgroup
<http://www.jibbering.com/faq/faq_notes/pots1.htm>
(see "Additional Reading") and
<FAQ**TRY>
<http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post>
</FAQ**TRY>

</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0fMBbpANO2FBFwxr%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: how to add 2 values: nb.value and n=2"
Date="2004-08-09 10:16:40 PST">

Section "2.3 What do I have to do before posting to clj?" is aimed
largely at the enquirer.

ISTM that it would be useful to divide it, like Gaul, into three sub-
sections; the first applying to all articles, the second to initial
questions, and the third to responses - splitting should be a mainly
drag'n'drop edit.

Then to the responses section could be added something expressing a
preference for responses to be either tested or marked as untested.

And to the common section a preference for code to be copy'n'pasted,
rather than typed in, whenever possible.

2.3 para 1, of -> with.
</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=BbWM6nAo4iGBFwvw%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: Calendar html page"
Date="2004-08-11 10:07:49 PST">

When posting code to news, it is the POSTER's duty to ensure that his
system does not, by line-wrapping, break the code. Readers should not
have to do this. <FAQ**TRY>

</QUOTE>

The notes already go into some detail on the why and how of this. As
the point of the notes was to avoid bloating the FAQ proper by trying
to include an inappropriate level of detail I would rather leave the
FAQ as it is in this respect.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=IWNeJhCCQPHBFw2B%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: Help with the printdate()"
Date="2004-08-13 10:27:12 PST">


IMHO, 2.10 should be Multinationalisation. That is adjustment for
different locales, whereas Internationalisation means using a single
form acceptable everywhere. dependant -> dependent.

It would be a good place to recommend, as an example, internationalising
to ISO 8601.
</QUOTE>

I think this is a case where the formal meaning of words is at odds
with how those words are employed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=VcednRpZ4sb4Ba_cRVn-gA%40comcast.com"
From="Randy Webb"
Subject="FAQ Questions"
Date="2004-08-29 20:00:53 PST">

And in http://jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_43, any chance of adding a snippet
about this bookmarklet:

javascript:'<code><ol><li>'+(document.documentElem ent||document.body).
outerHTML.replace(/&/g,"&amp;").replace(/</g,"&lt;").
replace(/%20%20/g,"&nbsp;%20").replace(/\n/g,"<li>")+'<\/ol><\/code>';

I don't recall who wrote it, but it gives you the source of the
document, with line numbers, to make debugging in IE a lot simpler.

</QUOTE>

I started writing this up, including some variations such as this
frameset version:-

javascriptfunction(frm){
frm.__outHTMLDate ='<html><head><title>'+
(frm.document.title||frm.location.href)+
'</title></head><body><code><ol><li>'+
frm.document.documentElement.innerHTML.
replace(/&/g,"&amp;").
replace(/</g,"&lt;").
replace(/%20%20/g,"&nbsp;%20").
replace(/\n/g,"<li>")+
'</ol></code></body></html>';
frm.open('javascriptpener.__outHTMLDate','');
for(var c = frm.frames.length;c--{
try(){
arguments.callee(frm.frames[c]);
}catch(e){;}
}
})(top);

- with the idea of adding it to the miscellaneous tricks and tips
page. But I have already written what could be a page of its own
on javascript URLs useful for web development, so I will include
it as a separate page when it is finished.

Everyone is welcome to submit other proposals for inclusion
(preferably with some explanation of how your examples work).

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4140c70c%240%2432725%24626a14ce%40news .free.fr"
From="Yann-Erwan Perio"
Subject="Re: Browser Height in IE? NOT document height"
Date"2004-09-09 14:11:41 PST">

In 4_9 the variable redefinition in the different branchs is misleading,
variable definitions occur once, when execution scopes are created,
their initialization come later within the corresponding statement
execution (Ecma-263-12.2).
</QUOTE>

Done.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=yc5vzjd1v1wl%24.nt8k0zov2j9u%24.dlg%40 40tude.net"
From="Andrew Thompson"
Subject="Top warning signs of bad code?"
Date="2004-09-19 16:44:04 PST">

It seems most people get there JS off web sites, which is
entirely logical. But it is also a great pity since most
of that code is of such poor quality.

I was looking through the JS FAQ for any question that
identifies the warning signs to look out for, the things
that most easily and clearly identify the author of code
as something less than a master of the art.

I did not find an FAQ that answered it, but I think the FAQ
should contain the info., so, here is my proposed list..

<FAQ**TRY class='more_Speculative_For_Discussion_OK?'>
1 <SCRIPT LANGUAGE='JavaScript'> // last millenium, or another reality?
2 if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf("IE")) // #FAQ4_26
3 eval(); // #FAQ4_40 (usually)
4 if (..==true) // !understanding boolean.
5 <a href="javascript:somefunction()"> // #FAQ4_24
6 <NOSCRIPT> // If missing, the script does not degrade gracefully.
7 document.write("<p>Important content.."); // delivering content.
</FAQ**TRY>

What is your opinion? Are these the top 7?
Which 28 did I miss?

Also, why does the FAQ not contain the words "degrade",
"graceful" or "noscript" (I guess I might have been
looking for the wrong term with the first two, but
no mention of NOSCRIPT? That surprised me.)

BTW - The Jibbering JS FAQ is the single greatest FAQ*
I use, but I just have a hankerin' to get mentioned in
it, or at least contribute to it.

* I have my own (fledgling) Java FAQ that I hope might
approach the quality of the JS FAQ one day, and am a
contributor to the recently expanded and improved
c.i.w.a.s. FAQ.
</QUOTE>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=8MGz%24XJiZXUBFwJv%40merlyn.demon.co.u k"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: Have a Javascript that keeps a cookie on a popup"
Date="2004-09-22 10:08:53 PST">


The FAQ index has nothing general on cookies. Sec 4.4 should be
generalised :


4.4 Why and how are cookies used ?

Cookies are used to maintain information either during ... or for a
longer definable period. Users often do not allow them.

To test whether the present browser accepts cookies, write
a cookie, read it back and check whether it is the same.

For example cookie code, see ...

http://tech.irt.org/articles/js064/index.htm
Additional Notes:
http://www.jibbering.com/faq/faq_notes/cookies.html
</QUOTE>


---------------------------------------------------------------------


<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=jC0Uc%24HasaYBFwbb%40merlyn.demon.co.u k"
From="Dr John Stockton ((E-Mail Removed))
Subject="Re: Date problem"
Date="2004-10-04 15:18:23 PST">

You should have something like

str = LZ( d.getMonth()+1 ) + '/' + LZ( d.getDate() ) + '/' ;

<FAQ**TRY> Change date3 to date2

Always, modularise out common or repeated functions, and test them
independently.

</QUOTE>

Done.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ehtrEpI%24kqYBFweg%40merlyn.demon.co.u k"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: Email Script"
Date="2004-10-05 10:25:43 PST">

This question, too, should be a <FAQ**TRY>, to point out that mailto:...
can only work on systems with an appropriately-configured browser-mailer
interface (and that not all of those can do Subject).

Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily the
person who "owns" the browser.

Therefore, there should always be a means of giving the E-mail address
independently of mailto:.

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.
</QUOTE>


---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=CpksWXKcXSZBFw1o%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: Date problem"
Date="2004-10-07 10:49:42 PST">

<FAQ**TRY> The string "tutor" appears only once. If any more good
tutorials are known, it would be well to link to them with wording which
a search for "tutor" would find.
</QUOTE>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=m5ilyqCl8QhBFwwX%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: strange error"
Date="2004-10-31 10:45:16 PST">

FAQ 4.12 needs a link to FAQ 4.21

</QUOTE>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=k3OFx1EYZPiBFw5X%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: How to build a reference to a global variable"
Date="2004-11-03 10:21:51 PST">

ECMA 327

</QUOTE>

Done. Maybe I should mention ECMA 357 as well (for completeness, as I don't think any implementations exist yet), but I
had better read it first.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=41B09624.EA19E9A2%40agricoreunited.com "
From="Grant Wagner">

Any reference to a URL prefixed with:

<url: http://devedge.netscape.com/library/.../1.3/reference />

should be replaced with

<url: http://docs.sun.com/source/816-6408-10 />

I believe that will result in all links working.
</QUOTE>

I was hoping someone would take over the devedge content (Mozilla.org has been mentioned in that context quite a bit
recently) so I could fix all the dead links to it in the FAQ. I assume that Sun have in fact been reproducing the
JavaScript docs for some time.

It didn't quite work to just substitute the beginning of the URL for Sun's as Sun have changed the .html extensions that
Netscape used for .htm extensions, but that done and all the links are working again.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=M2MfRdHoLOsBFwcp%40merlyn.demon.co.uk"
From="Dr John Stockton">

Aside: <FAQ**TRY> That is not found by a search for "Shuffle" - I
suggest changing to "How to Deal and Shuffle" </FAQ**TRY>
</QUOTE>

Done.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
From="Jim Ley">
How's the FAQ updating going?

I was wondering if:

http://jan.kollhof.net/projects/js/oopjs/index.xhtml

would be worth including aswell.

</QUOTE>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
From="Jim Ley">

Someone also mentioned including PPK's quirksmode.org in 3.2.

</QUOTE>

When <URL: http://www.quirksmode.org > is a page that says: "Unfortunately your browser does not support the JavaScript
necessary for the advanced interface." (while using IE 6?) I become resistant to the idea of recommending it to others.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=cJBrO%2BH%24TBUBFwti%40merlyn.demon.co .uk"
From="Dr John Stockton"
Subject="Re: item not defined using Mozilla?"
Date="2004-09-21 10:08:44 PST">

Present Usenet thinking encourages proper attributions; see Usefor work-
in-progress at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...-useage-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...article-13.txt


An informative attribution would have made it clear that the idiot
savant child Lahn is, once more, contributing to an ancient thread.
<snip>
The FAQ should cite the above, or successor, documents; and perhaps also
that in sig line 2, which is so widely useful.
</QUOTE>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
<QUOTE
From="Dr John Stockton">

<snip>
In page cookies.html :

ISTM that, while the code now presented will not error if "cookie" ->
"ignore", it will not read/write cookies either.
ISTM that substitution of .cookie to .ignore could be prevented by,
basically,
var DC = "document.coo"+"kie"
or var DC = "eikooc.tnemucod".split('').reverse().join('')
function GetCooks() { return eval(DC) }
function PutCooks(S) { eval(DC + "=" + S) }



I suggest that you cite, in FAQ or notes,
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...article-13.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...-useage-00.txt
which represent current thinking about News articles. It might make
Thomas Lahn see sense, or at least moderate his behaviour.


The FAQ cites one news:microsoft.* group; but ISTM that Sec 2.7 should
cite news:microsoft.public.scripting.jscript
and news:microsoft.public.scripting.wsh

It could be useful to cite also a newsgroup that deals with Web servers
as such.
</QUOTE>

I have added the two URLs to the end of the page on posting to the
group. I don't think that have a place in the FAQ proper
until/unless they are formally adopted.

Thoms Lahn's obsession with aspects of posts to the group that are
apparently considered insignificant/irrelevant to everyone else has
resulted in numerous requests for the FAQ to be changed in a way
that discourages him. I really don't like the idea of making changes
to the FAQ for this reason alone, but expressed popular opinion is
in favour of some action in this direction.

So I have added to the following paragraph to section 2.3:-

<DRAFT>
Don't expect to be able to e-mail contributors to the group privately.
Stated originating e-mail addresses are often obscured, fictional or
unmonitored span sinks (this is an increasingly normal (and even
unofficially recommended) practice as open e-mail addresses in news
articles will be both the target of spam and used as fake sender's
addresses in spam to third parties).
<\DRAFT>

In the hope of undermining some of the comments on From addresses.
And added the following to the page on posting to the group:-

<DRAFT>
Attribution

Material that is quoted is expected to be accurately attributed to
its author in some way. As responses should quote sufficient of the
text to which they are responding to provide a context for the
response, responses must also contain the attribution of that
quoted material.

Styles of attribution may vary considerably. The exact information
contained, and the text in which it is contained, is largely up to
the judgement of the individual posting (so long as the information
is accurate and the text non-inflammatory). A minimum attribution
should attempt to identify the individual who wrote the text that
is being responded to:-

John Smith wrote:
> Message text ...


Other styles include more information about the preceding message:-

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 08:44:52 +1000,
John Smith <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Message text ...


Including the time of the original message and the e-mail address
of its sender (as extracted from the From header (so not
necessarily his real e-mail address).

A more elaborate attribution may include the Message-ID,
Newsgroups, etc.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
dated Sat, 4 Dec 2004 08:44:52, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript,
John Smith <(E-Mail Removed)> posted :
> Message text ...


This information content originates in the message headers and might
be regarded as of little interest to individuals using news reader
software and having a local copy of the original message, as they
can directly view that message in full and extract any information
they need from those headers. In those circumstances a more verbose
header might be regarded as, at best, providing quicker access to
some of the information they may be interested in; quickly observing,
for example, the list of groups to which a message may have been
cross-posted, or the date of a message that is getting a response
some significant time after it was originally posted.

However, news servers and newsreaders do not store messages
indefinitely, and message access is not away via those mechanisms.
Web based access may not reproduce message headers in full, and
massages may be quoted in other contexts (even in isolation) without
their headers. A more detailed attribution may allow the reader of
such a message to use the various newsgroup archives to reconstruct
the context of the original message; using, for example, a cited
Message-Id to locate the thread containing the original message, or
a date to see that an opinion expressed is too historic to be
considered definitive in a contemporary context.

On the other hand, attributions should not become excessive. Personal
judgement probably being a reasonable guide as to what should be
considered excessive. Reproducing all of the headers from the message
that is being quoted would certainly be excessive; headers such as
Path and References are potentially large to start with, and of
little value along side Message-Id, and reproducing headers such as
User-Agent, NNTP-Posting-Host, X-Complaints-To,
Content-Transfer-Encoding and Content-Type are just going to consume
bandwidth without providing much potential return.

It may be observed that an attributed quote will often be included
in an attributed quote that follows it up. Resulting in attributed
conversations. Much as quoted text should be trimmed to preserve only
the information required for context, quoted attributions may be
trimmed, once nested, to keep the attribution accurate but avoid
repeating information. For example, A more verbose attribution that
includes a newsgroup list, nested inside an attribution that
contains that same newsgroup list, is wasting bandwidth to no
purpose. The inner attributions might be stripped of that list
because its presence in an outermost attribution would probably
provide all the information necessary. Similarly, in a conversation
happening over a limited time period the exact date and time of
each contribution is probably excessive, as the time of any on
(probably the latest) message should adequately provide historical
context and be sufficient for archive retrieval (though including
dates to indicate significant intervals in conversations might be
considered informative).

While the text that surrounds any informational content of an
attribution may be a matter of judgement on the part of the
individual creating it (so long as the attribution is accurate),
content that is intended to be humorous or ironic may not be
perceived as such in the international context of
comp.lang.javascript, and text that is irrelevantly verbose may
not be perceived as appropriate in a group with an exclusively
technical subject. Such attribution styles may provoke an
unexpectedly negative attitude in other contributors to the group
and should be given due consideration prior to their use;
attribution texts that are short and to the point are unlikely to
elicit any reaction at all.
<\DRAFT>

- which includes specific examples of attributions that Lahn would
categorise as novels (regardless of the fact that his complaint
apparently hangs on a very literal interpretations of the word
'line') And generally leaves attributions up to the judgement of
the individual (within reason).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

<QUOTE
From="Dr John Stockton">

BTW, I'd find FAQ section 3.2 better (in HTML) as <ul> ... </ul>.

</QUOTE>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dr John Stockton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-06-2004
JRS: In article <cp0f4m$lc8$1$(E-Mail Removed)>, dated Mon, 6
Dec 2004 02:11:32, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Richard Cornford
<(E-Mail Removed)> posted :
>For the last couple of months I have been trying to get the next round
>of updates to the FAQ underway
> ...



><QUOTE
>cite="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4000378.estkDNKM41%40PointedEars.de"
>From="Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"
>Subject="Re: String replace alternative"
>Date="2004-08-06 16:14:41 PST">
><snip>
>Please do not write attribution novels, see
><http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
>as referred to by the FAQ of this newsgroup


It should be removed from the FAQ/notes. On such matters, the FAQ
should rely only on recognised international standards.



>IMHO, 2.10 should be Multinationalisation. That is adjustment for
>different locales, whereas Internationalisation means using a single
>form acceptable everywhere. dependant -> dependent.


>I think this is a case where the formal meaning of words is at odds
>with how those words are employed.


One should not pander to the semi-illiterate. It is much better to use
(with a correct description) a single standard form world-wide than to
attempt to adapt for local preferences. Remember what Fred Hoyle wrote!




>I suggest that you cite, in FAQ or notes,
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...article-13.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...-useage-00.txt
>which represent current thinking about News articles. It might make
>Thomas Lahn see sense, or at least moderate his behaviour.




>Styles of attribution may vary considerably. The exact information
>contained, and the text in which it is contained, is largely up to
>the judgement of the individual posting (so long as the information
>is accurate and the text non-inflammatory). A minimum attribution
>should attempt to identify the individual who wrote the text that
>is being responded to:-
>
>John Smith wrote:
>> Message text ...



No, one should not suggest less than USEFOR says. The USEFOR documents
are not yet authoritative, but their authors are more expert on the
subject than all of us put together. The personal name is not enough;
I've seen two apparently-distinct just-"Lee"s here , and others equally
entitles to be called that.


Timo - see below - *is* a reliable authority, though.




Updating the FAQ is evidently a major exercise. How about replacing one
of the duplicate weekly postings with a "Draft Changes" section, in
plain text to enable easy editing?

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME ©
Web <URL:http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html> -> Timo Salmi: Usenet Q&A.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/news-use.htm> : about usage of News.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Michael Winter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-06-2004
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:11:32 -0000, Richard Cornford
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

[snip]

> <URL: http://www.litotes.demon.co.uk/js_in...8_1_Draft.html >


Section 2.3, last paragraph, last sentence: delete the first "often".

[snip]

> As usual comments, feed-back, corrections, additional requests and
> suggestions are welcome. (additional request are most likely to be acted
> upon if they are fairly concrete, particularly in terms of proposed
> wording and tested script examples).


The only additional content I'm considering is regarding hash tables. Do
they warrant an entry in the FAQ or the notes?

I've made something of a hybrid from a hash table implementation of yours
that's closer to the one provided in java.util.Hashtable. The biggest
difference being the ability to add any number of unique keys which
produce the same value with String(key). Another is that Iterators (rather
than Enumerations) do not allow concurrent modifications. If the
underlying hash table is modified, any "active" iterators will report
false from Iterator.hasNext() on subsequent calls.

The current (unpolished and uncommented) version is at
<URL:http://www.mlwinter.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/clj/hash.js>. However, I've
had to rework major parts of it so expect bugs. Previously, the Element
prototype had put, get and remove methods, but during a performance test
with 1000 elements (some results are below) I found just how little
tolerance IE and Firefox have for recursion.

[snip]

> ISTM that it would be good to have an entry on RegExps for validation.
> Is the FAQ still being updated?
> </QUOTE>


I'm curious to know if Dr Stockton was refering to regular expressions in
general, or e-mail address validation.

[snip]

> The FAQ index has nothing general on cookies.


Is it really necessary, though? I'm sure there are plenty of adequate
references to be found on the Web.

> Sec 4.4 should be generalised :
>
> 4.4 Why and how are cookies used ?
>
> Cookies are used to maintain information either during ...


"a session"?

> or for a longer definable period. Users often do not allow them.


Is that last statement accurate, or over-the-top. I think a warning that
users do disallow cookies would be sufficient.

[snip]

> So I have added to the following paragraph to section 2.3:-
>
> <DRAFT>
> Don't expect to be able to e-mail contributors to the group privately.
> Stated originating e-mail addresses are often obscured, fictional or
> [...]


I think the first two words are unnecessary and complicate the sentence. I
think

E-mail addresses are often obscured...

would be better.

[snip]

> Web based access may not reproduce message headers in full, and massages
> may be quoted [...]


Massages?

[snip]

Mike


Time to add 1000 elements Obtaining 1000th element
Opera: 844ms 1.375ms
IE6: 515ms 0.985ms
Firefox: 296ms 0.547ms

Executing toString Updating 1000th element
Opera: 743.7ms 1.750ms
IE6: 484.3ms 1.078ms
Firefox: 339.1ms 0.672ms

Removing 1000th element[1]
Opera: 1.733ms
IE6: 1.125ms
Firefox: 0.781ms

[1] After every removal, the element was replaced. I subtracted the time
obtained in the fourth test (updating the 1000th element) to try to negate
the extra operations the replacement would involve.

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dr John Stockton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-06-2004
JRS: In article <opsilrs6aax13kvk@atlantis>, dated Mon, 6 Dec 2004
20:09:15, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Michael Winter <M.Winter@bl
ueyonder.co.invalid> posted :
>On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:11:32 -0000, Richard Cornford
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>> ISTM that it would be good to have an entry on RegExps for validation.
>> Is the FAQ still being updated?
>> </QUOTE>

>
>I'm curious to know if Dr Stockton was refering to regular expressions in
>general, or e-mail address validation.


The article had Subject="Re: How to verify an email address". There is
far more to say about RegExps than would fit properly into the FAQ, even
far more about RegExps for address validation. But ISTM that a Q on
RegExps could use address validation as an example, or a Q on validation
would introduce RegExps.

In either case, it would provide a location for a link or two on
RegExps, including the useful reference which is probably at
http://docs.sun.com/source/816-6408-10/regexp.htm
give or take case of letters; and for an indication that a check such as
/^.+@.+\..+$/ is useful whereas a full check against RFCs and known TLDs
is perhaps overdoing it.


>[snip]
>
>> The FAQ index has nothing general on cookies.

>
>Is it really necessary, though? I'm sure there are plenty of adequate
>references to be found on the Web.


Yes, and plenty of bad ones too, and there might even be javascripted
sites calculating bakery. A mention in the FAQ is a chance to add a
good link or two.

For any sub-topic of [Web] javascript that is frequently discussed,
there should be an entry in the FAQ findable by searching for the
obvious keyword[s], even if it only gives a link. The topic may then
cease to be frequently discussed.



>> Sec 4.4 should be generalised :
>>
>> 4.4 Why and how are cookies used ?
>>
>> Cookies are used to maintain information either during ...

>
>"a session"?
>
>> or for a longer definable period. Users often do not allow them.

>
>Is that last statement accurate, or over-the-top. I think a warning that
>users do disallow cookies would be sufficient.


"sometimes"?




>> Stated originating e-mail addresses are often obscured, fictional or
>> [...]


> I think the first two words are unnecessary and complicate the
> sentence.


Moreover, it's the effective Reply-To which matters, not the originator.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Delphi 3 Turnpike 4 ©
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;
<URL:http://www.bancoems.com/CompLangPascalDelphiMisc-MiniFAQ.htm> clpdmFAQ;
<URL:http://www.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html> news:borland.* Guidelines
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Winter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2004
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 20:09:15 GMT, Michael Winter
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

[snip]

> The only additional content I'm considering is regarding hash tables.


Lies!

I've mentioned a couple of times now the difference between arrays and
objects with regard to square bracket notation. Specifically:

This method of property look-up also applies to arrays, too, but arrays
treat numbers specially. If the string can be converted to a number, then
back to a string and still match the original value exactly, it is
considered to be an array index not a property. So:

'10' -> 10 -> '10' '10' array index
'05' -> 5 -> '5' '05' property name
'fg' -> NaN -> 'NaN' 'fg' property name

With objects, numbers are just property names, nothing more.

Should that be mentioned (in some form) somewhere in the Notes article?

[snip]

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: [Roundup-users] Roundup Issue Tracker release 1.4.7 Richard Jones Python 0 03-14-2009 12:24 AM
CompactFlash Card Roundup: 1GB Models Silverstrand Front Page News 0 08-29-2005 05:12 PM
Foxconn Intel Dual Core Mainboard Roundup Silverstrand Front Page News 0 08-01-2005 08:18 PM
web requests and mobile requests Fernando Arámburu ASP .Net 1 04-08-2005 07:13 PM
FAQ update (roundup of pending requests - for comment) Richard Cornford Javascript 6 01-10-2004 01:30 PM



Advertisments