f



mini-tutorial needed: 'target=""' attribute for 'A'

What I knew, from back in the days of tab-less browsers: an anchor "tag" of
form <A href="WhatHaveYou" target="_blank"> used to open a fresh browser
window to display whatever the URI "WhatHaveYou" had on offer.

In these days of tabbed browsers, though, there must be two attribute value
candidates, one for spawning a new *window*, one for opening a new *tab*,
and I'll  be sempiternally grateful to whoever teaches me what they are.

Cheers, and TIA, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/1/2012 9:49:44 PM
comp.authoring.html 7078 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

42 Replies
804 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 39

In article <1gvfvb0tom0wx.w54jj69q61gb.dlg@40tude.net>,
 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:

> What I knew, from back in the days of tab-less browsers: an anchor "tag" of
> form <A href="WhatHaveYou" target="_blank"> used to open a fresh browser
> window to display whatever the URI "WhatHaveYou" had on offer.
> 
> In these days of tabbed browsers, though, there must be two attribute value
> candidates, one for spawning a new *window*, one for opening a new *tab*,
> and I'll  be sempiternally grateful to whoever teaches me what they are.

Whether a link with this attribute opens in a new window or a tab is 
under the user's control. Firefox (Mac), for example, even has a 
preference (option) that is called "Open new windows in a new tab 
instead", not or un ticking this will cause such links to open in a 
fresh window. 

There's no other attribute that will force the alternative so it could 
not be the case that there must be one. This is on the principle that 
if x is necessary then x is the case and cannot not be the case. Or 
something like that, it is first thing on Sunday morning, I will look 
into this deep principle later.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/1/2012 10:16:44 PM
In article <dorayme-3294ED.08164302092012@news.albasani.net>,
 dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article <1gvfvb0tom0wx.w54jj69q61gb.dlg@40tude.net>,
>  tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
> 
> > What I knew, from back in the days of tab-less browsers: an anchor "tag" of
> > form <A href="WhatHaveYou" target="_blank"> used to open a fresh browser
> > window to display whatever the URI "WhatHaveYou" had on offer.
> > 
> > In these days of tabbed browsers, though, there must be two attribute value
> > candidates, one for spawning a new *window*, one for opening a new *tab*,
> > and I'll  be sempiternally grateful to whoever teaches me what they are.
> 
> Whether a link with this attribute opens in a new window or a tab is 
> under the user's control. Firefox (Mac), for example, even has a 
> preference (option) that is called "Open new windows in a new tab 
> instead", not or un ticking this will cause such links to open in a 
> fresh window. 
> 
> There's no other attribute that will force the alternative so it could 
> not be the case that there must be one. This is on the principle that 
> if x is necessary then x is the case and cannot not be the case. Or 
> something like that, it is first thing on Sunday morning, I will look 
> into this deep principle later.

Exactly. But it's not Sunday here yet. All my browsers are set to open 
"target" in new tabs. If you want a new window, you'll need to do it in 
Javascript (essentially a pop-up).
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/1/2012 10:41:03 PM
In article <50428f08$0$1378$c3e8da3$69010069@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <dorayme-3294ED.08164302092012@news.albasani.net>,
>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1gvfvb0tom0wx.w54jj69q61gb.dlg@40tude.net>,
> >  tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > What I knew, from back in the days of tab-less browsers: an anchor "tag" 
> > > of
> > > form <A href="WhatHaveYou" target="_blank"> used to open a fresh browser
> > > window to display whatever the URI "WhatHaveYou" had on offer.
> > > 
> > > In these days of tabbed browsers, though, there must be two attribute 
> > > value
> > > candidates, one for spawning a new *window*, one for opening a new *tab*,
> > > and I'll  be sempiternally grateful to whoever teaches me what they are.
> > 
> > Whether a link with this attribute opens in a new window or a tab is 
> > under the user's control. Firefox (Mac), for example, even has a 
> > preference (option) that is called "Open new windows in a new tab 
> > instead", not or un ticking this will cause such links to open in a 
> > fresh window. 
> > 
> > There's no other attribute that will force the alternative so it could 
> > not be the case that there must be one. This is on the principle that 
> > if x is necessary then x is the case and cannot not be the case. Or 
> > something like that, it is first thing on Sunday morning, I will look 
> > into this deep principle later.
> 
> Exactly. But it's not Sunday here yet. All my browsers are set to open 
> "target" in new tabs. If you want a new window, you'll need to do it in 
> Javascript (essentially a pop-up).

Yes, and that too faces hurdles from browser settings and add-ons.

From the user's point of view, btw, just talking straight html links 
with or without attributes, at least on Macs, you can force a new 
window on a tactical basis by Option Command click. There are all 
manner of ways of going. Even without the target attribute, you can 
force a link to open in a fresh tab with Command click. 

That old target=_new was an interesting idea. It reserved a window (or 
a tab) and opens other "new"ly attributed links to that same window or 
tab. Try it.

Mostly, I reckon, authors have work enough to do without worrying 
about how everyone should view their links. If they don't know how to 
browse and use their reasonably basic facilities, that's on them.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/2/2012 12:39:27 AM
On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 08:16:44 +1000, dorayme wrote:

> Whether a link with this attribute opens in a new window or a tab is 
> under the user's control. 
> ...
> There's no other attribute that will force the alternative so it could 
> not be the case that there must be one. ...

OK, thanks. So it's just as it was in the 20th century: the 21st century
HTML author (non-Frames, non-Strict) can try for opening in the same old
window (omit any target attribute) or opening elsewhere (use
target="_blank"), but has no hope of urging whether to use a new tab or a
full-blown new browser window. Pity.

(And I thought it was otherwise, with me just not fishing the Google waters
quite proficiently enough :-) . And no, I don't want any Java[script]-based
solutions -- I'm assuming my viewers have all J-stuff turned off.)

Thanks, dorayme. Sorry to muck up an otherwise pleasant Sunday AM for you.
Carry on as if I hadn't ever intruded :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/2/2012 1:35:56 AM
In article <1xlbf6qgba48s.if2ow1vhn2le$.dlg@40tude.net>,
 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 08:16:44 +1000, dorayme wrote:
> 
> > Whether a link with this attribute opens in a new window or a tab is 
> > under the user's control. 
> > ...
> > There's no other attribute that will force the alternative so it could 
> > not be the case that there must be one. ...
> 
> OK, thanks. So it's just as it was in the 20th century: the 21st century
> HTML author (non-Frames, non-Strict)

It still works in Strict (just annoys the validator). More 
importantly, it has been undeprecated and resurrected formally or 
kosherly for HTML5 


> can try for opening in the same old
> window (omit any target attribute) or opening elsewhere (use
> target="_blank"), but has no hope of urging whether to use a new tab or a
> full-blown new browser window. Pity.
> 
> (And I thought it was otherwise, with me just not fishing the Google waters
> quite proficiently enough :-) . And no, I don't want any Java[script]-based
> solutions -- I'm assuming my viewers have all J-stuff turned off.)
>

Well, unless your visitors are rather unusual, they will not have js 
off. Actually, I think js pop windows are not all bad, but my 
bodyguards have the day off today and so I better not elaborate.

  
> Thanks, dorayme. Sorry to muck up an otherwise pleasant Sunday AM for you.
> Carry on as if I hadn't ever intruded :-) .
> 

You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
to be in love!

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/2/2012 3:51:13 AM
In article <dorayme-FB9A2B.13511302092012@news.albasani.net>,
 dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
> to be in love!

I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and 
that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus 
Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely, 
dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours? 

I mean, it's Labo(u)r Day here, and neither fall nor (certainly not) 
winter start now. I am, however, sadly packing away all my white sox. 
New Yorkers would say I'm putting my saahwcks in a baahwcks.

Or is this some fiat of the Australian Government? "It's first die of 
spreeng, cobbah, thets the rule you'll bloody well folla it, I reckin."
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/2/2012 1:22:09 PM
Warren Oates wrote:

>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
>> to be in love!
> 
> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet

That much is true, if "reversed" in the southern hemisphere of the Earth is 
thought as being relative to its northern hemisphere and "reverse" as 
defined as a bijective relation from summer to winter, and autumn to spring.  
(Of course, nothing is reversed with regard to the order of the seasons; the 
southern hemisphere's spring still comes after the southern hemisphere's 
winter and so on.)  The reason for that is, of course, that the rotation 
axis of the Earth is tilted by ca. 23.4°.

> (and that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it)

The _Coriolis effect_ has nothing to do with the direction in how water is 
drained (for example, down a toilet); that is a myth.

> but surely, dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just
> like ours?

Thas is off-topic here, too, but the correct answer to it obviously is yes.
 
You should do more reading in order to avoid displaying your ignorance about 
basic truths of your existence again.


F'up2 poster

PointedEars
-- 
    realism:    HTML 4.01 Strict
    evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
    madness:    XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
                                                    -- Bjoern Hoehrmann
0
Thomas
9/2/2012 3:14:08 PM
In article <1654913.tpcjM75jIz@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> Warren Oates wrote:
> 
> >  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
> >> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
> >> to be in love!
> > 
> > I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet
> 
> That much is true, if "reversed" in the southern hemisphere of the Earth is 
> thought as being relative to its northern hemisphere and "reverse" as 
> defined as a bijective relation from summer to winter, and autumn to spring.  
> (Of course, nothing is reversed with regard to the order of the seasons; the 
> southern hemisphere's spring still comes after the southern hemisphere's 
> winter and so on.)  The reason for that is, of course, that the rotation 
> axis of the Earth is tilted by ca. 23.4°.
> 
> > (and that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
> > Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it)
> 
> The _Coriolis effect_ has nothing to do with the direction in how water is 
> drained (for example, down a toilet); that is a myth.
> 
> > but surely, dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just
> > like ours?
> 
> Thas is off-topic here, too, but the correct answer to it obviously is yes.
>  
> You should do more reading in order to avoid displaying your ignorance about 
> basic truths of your existence again.
> 
> 
> F'up2 poster
> 
> PointedEars

My goodness, you're a humo(u)rless fella, aren't you, Bruce? 

We've never had a "toilet," we just spread a little straw around, so 
I've never actually seen water go down a toilet one way or another. 
Also, it's well known that Shakespeare's play "Coriolis" was a tragedy 
about star-crossed lovers whose seasons were reversed and who couldn't 
come to terms with the different way the water went down their drains.

"Do you flush your jakes at me?"
"I flush my jakes sir."

Oh, yeah, Bruce, don't request email responses. Y'all can go to hell 
with that one.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/2/2012 6:15:01 PM
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Warren Oates wrote:

> Also, it's well known that Shakespeare's play "Coriolis" was a tragedy 
> about star-crossed lovers whose seasons were reversed and who couldn't 
> come to terms with the different way the water went down their drains.
> 
> "Do you flush your jakes at me?"

That's Shakespeare? I would have expected:
"Flushest thou thy jakes at me?"

-- 
Helmut Richter
0
Helmut
9/2/2012 7:14:46 PM
Warren Oates wrote:

> My goodness, you're a humo(u)rless fella, aren't you, Bruce?

My name is not Bruce, and you should not try to claim that the nonsense you 
posted out of ignorance was a joke.  It only makes you look all the more 
stupid.
 
BTW, I have a lot of humor, which you would know if you could read, but the 
truth needs to be said as well.

> Oh, yeah, Bruce, don't request email responses. Y'all can go to hell 
                                                  ^^^^^
> with that one.

Who are these Bruce people anyway?

BTW, putting it in words that you are able to understand, your Subject and 
quoting suck big time.


F'up2 poster

PointedEars
-- 
When all you know is jQuery, every problem looks $(olvable).
0
Thomas
9/2/2012 7:18:57 PM
On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:

> In article <dorayme-FB9A2B.13511302092012@news.albasani.net>,
>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
>> to be in love!
> 
> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely,
> dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours?

No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes and 
solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American calendar 
printers, persuant to the human (and especially American) preference 
for answers that are definite over answers that are right. Many parts 
of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait (badastronomy.com) and 
others.

-- 
John W Kennedy
"But now is a new thing which is very old--
that the rich make themselves richer and not poorer,
which is the true Gospel, for the poor's sake."
  -- Charles Williams.  "Judgement at Chelmsford"

0
John
9/2/2012 9:28:34 PM
In article 
<alpine.LNX.2.00.1209022104280.14864@badwlrz-clhri01.ws.lrz.de>,
 Helmut Richter <hhr-m@web.de> wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Warren Oates wrote:
> 
> > Also, it's well known that Shakespeare's play "Coriolis" was a tragedy 
> > about star-crossed lovers whose seasons were reversed and who couldn't 
> > come to terms with the different way the water went down their drains.
> > 
> > "Do you flush your jakes at me?"
> 
> That's Shakespeare? I would have expected:
> "Flushest thou thy jakes at me?"

Yes, that is much more Shakespearian, more dramatically declarative.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/2/2012 9:56:07 PM
In article <5043a22f$0$1562$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <1654913.tpcjM75jIz@PointedEars.de>,
>  Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> 
> > Warren Oates wrote:
> > 
....
> 
> My goodness, you're a humo(u)rless fella, aren't you, Bruce? 
> 

Wonder if "Thomas" is the Germanic Monty Python franchise's "Bruce"? 

Perhaps this would not work in German with Thomas instead of Bruce in:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_f_p0CgPeyA>

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/2/2012 10:11:35 PM
On 09/02/2012 09:22 AM, Warren Oates wrote:
> In article <dorayme-FB9A2B.13511302092012@news.albasani.net>,
>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
>> to be in love!
> 
> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and 
> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus 
> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely, 
> dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours? 
> 
> I mean, it's Labo(u)r Day here, and neither fall nor (certainly not) 
> winter start now. I am, however, sadly packing away all my white sox. 
> New Yorkers would say I'm putting my saahwcks in a baahwcks.
> 
> Or is this some fiat of the Australian Government? "It's first die of 
> spreeng, cobbah, thets the rule you'll bloody well folla it, I reckin."
> 

I learned something new today.

> In South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand, spring begins on 1 September, and has no relation to the vernal equinox.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spring_%28season%29

0
WaltS
9/2/2012 10:30:19 PM
John W Kennedy wrote:

> On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:
>>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
>>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
>>> to be in love!
>> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely,
>> dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours?
> 
> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes and
> solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American calendar
> printers, persuant to the human (and especially American) preference
> for answers that are definite over answers that are right. Many parts
> of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait (badastronomy.com) and
> others.

No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the astronomical 
(defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons (defined by the WMO).  
Incidentally, your posting is an example for the human preference for 
answers that are simple (and xenophobic) over answers that are correct.


PointedEars
-- 
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
  -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>
0
Thomas
9/2/2012 10:39:52 PM
On 2012-09-02 22:39:52 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:

> John W Kennedy wrote:
> 
>> On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:
>>> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
>>>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
>>>> to be in love!
>>> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>>> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>>> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely,
>>> dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours?
>> 
>> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes and
>> solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American calendar
>> printers, persuant to the human (and especially American) preference
>> for answers that are definite over answers that are right. Many parts
>> of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait (badastronomy.com) and
>> others.
> 
> No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the astronomical
> (defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons (defined by the WMO).

Wildly false dichotomy. There are a great many places where neither law 
nor custom observes either.

> Incidentally, your posting is an example for the human preference for
> answers that are simple (and xenophobic) over answers that are correct.

"Xenophobic", forsooth? I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions.

-- 
John W Kennedy
"Those in the seat of power oft forget their failings and seek only the 
obeisance of others!  Thus is bad government born!  Hold in your heart 
that you and the people are one, human beings all, and good government 
shall arise of its own accord!  Such is the path of virtue!"
  -- Kazuo Koike.  "Lone Wolf and Cub:  Thirteen Strings" (tr. Dana Lewis)

0
John
9/3/2012 12:41:56 AM
On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 13:51:13 +1000, dorayme wrote:

>  ...
> It still works in Strict (just annoys the validator). More 

Ah, but I don't :-) . (Too much bother editing/rewriting HTML to please the
overly finicky Strict validator.)

> importantly, it has been undeprecated and resurrected formally or 
> kosherly for HTML5 

Halal now for HTML5? Hallelujah!

> ... Well, unless your visitors are rather unusual, they will not have js 
> off. Actually, I think js pop windows are not all bad, but my 
> bodyguards have the day off today and so I better not elaborate.

Unusual is probably not they but I. I'd never think of requiring J-anything
of my visitors. Nor frames. Certainly never iFrames. But that's just me.
 
> ... You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
> to be in love!

Ahh :-) . And, to judge by your X-Face(*), no lovelier person to be in that
enviable state or condition, if I may say so.

Cheers, -- tlvp
----
(*)PS: is it meant as white stippling on a black background? or vice versa?
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/3/2012 4:54:09 AM
On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 09:22:09 -0400, Warren Oates wrote:

> In article <dorayme-FB9A2B.13511302092012@news.albasani.net>,
>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
>> to be in love!
> 
> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and 
> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus 
> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely, 
> dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours? 
> 
> I mean, it's Labo(u)r Day here, and neither fall nor (certainly not) 
> winter start now. I am, however, sadly packing away all my white sox. 

Oh, so you turn into a Red Sox fan, come Labor Day :-) ?

> New Yorkers would say I'm putting my saahwcks in a baahwcks.
> 
> Or is this some fiat of the Australian Government? "It's first die of 
> spreeng, cobbah, thets the rule you'll bloody well folla it, I reckin."

Be a little flexible, Warren: the 30th was the saint's day for Lima's Santa
Rosa, and the 2nd was National Day in Vietnam, each of which is tantamount
(in the right Southern Hemisphere culture) to a first day of Spring,
n'est-ce pas :-) ?

Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/3/2012 5:05:27 AM
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012 21:14:46 +0200, Helmut Richter wrote or quoted:

>> "Do you flush your jakes at me?"
> 
> That's Shakespeare? I would have expected:
> "Flushest thou thy jakes at me?"

Or, to preserve the OP's word order, "Dost thou flush thy jakes at me?"

Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/3/2012 5:14:32 AM
In article <zdhdz4fli2lv$.uzgcjxq1ykd9.dlg@40tude.net>,
 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 13:51:13 +1000, dorayme wrote:
> 
> >  ...

> > importantly, it has been undeprecated and resurrected formally or 
> > kosherly for HTML5 
> 
> Halal now for HTML5? 
>

I overheard a conversation between a local halal butcher and a 
customer once in which the butcher was saying that halal meat is 
similar in various important religious respects to kosher meat.
 
> > ... Well, unless your visitors are rather unusual, they will not have js 
> > off. Actually, I think js pop windows are not all bad, but my 
> > bodyguards have the day off today and so I better not elaborate.
> 
> Unusual is probably not they but I. I'd never think of requiring J-anything
> of my visitors. Nor frames. Certainly never iFrames. But that's just me.
>  

The way that still gets you into heaven is to use js but not to 
*require* it and not to make it so your visitors *has* to have it or 
else. In the case of a link that opens a js popup window when js is 
on, and there are no other blockers, you have to fashion your links or 
otherwise provide for the link to appear in a normal window or tab 
when js is off.

> > ... You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
> > hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
> > to be in love!
> 
> Ahh :-) . And, to judge by your X-Face(*), no lovelier person to be in that
> enviable state or condition, if I may say so.
> 

The idea is that you can't tell anything from my x-face, I was ordered 
to have one by an English gentleman recently.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/3/2012 6:50:13 AM
2012-09-03 9:50, dorayme wrote:

>>> importantly, it has been undeprecated and resurrected formally or
>>> kosherly for HTML5
>>
>> Halal now for HTML5?
>
> I overheard a conversation between a local halal butcher and a
> customer once in which the butcher was saying that halal meat is
> similar in various important religious respects to kosher meat.

Maybe similar, but not the same. The rules on supervision of the process 
require supervisors of different religious affiliation. I suppose, 
however, that many people living by kosher rules can still use halal, 
and vice versa.

This has no direct relationship with HTML, though it reminds me of two 
cults, or pseudo-religions, around "HTML5", called "W3C HTML5" and 
"WHATWG The Living Standard". And both of them seem to have missed the 
meaning of "HTML5" that has become popular and dominant among 
developers: HTML5 is HTML + CSS + JavaScript used to develop 
_applications_. But I digress (even from the digression).

> The way that still gets you into heaven is to use js but not to
> *require* it and not to make it so your visitors *has* to have it or
> else.

This used to be a good design principle, and it seems to have become 
more popular, perhaps especially thanks to the kind person(s) who coined 
a cool term for it: Unobtrusive JavaScript.

> In the case of a link that opens a js popup window when js is
> on, and there are no other blockers, you have to fashion your links or
> otherwise provide for the link to appear in a normal window or tab
> when js is off.

That part is simple. You simply set up a normal link, possibly with 
target="_blank", and then you start adding features without breaking 
anything. There's a useful slogan term for this, too: progressive 
enhancement. (My attempt at a cool term, "augmentative authoring", just 
didn't work. Luckily some people were better practical terminologists.)

The tricky part is to check all the features of opening a window in 
JavaScript, paying attention to browser differences in parameters and 
default values. But that's off-topic here. The following illustrates 
just the basic idea (of one possible approach) as fas as HTML is considered:

<a href="http://icant.co.uk/articles/seven-rules-of-unobtrusive-javascript/"
   target="_blank" onclick=
   "if(window.open) { window.open(this.href, '',
    'width=680,height=700,resizable=1,scrollbars=1'); return false}"
   >The seven rules of Unobtrusive JavaScript</a>

(The statement 'return false' aborts normal link processing, so that the 
external page won't be opened twice.)

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
0
Jukka
9/3/2012 7:22:00 AM
John W Kennedy wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>> On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:
>>>> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
>>>>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
>>>>> to be in love!
>>>> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>>>> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>>>> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but
>>>> surely, dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just
>>>> like ours?
>>> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes and
>>> solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American calendar
>>> printers, persuant to the human (and especially American) preference
>>> for answers that are definite over answers that are right. Many parts
>>> of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait (badastronomy.com) and
>>> others.
>> 
>> No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the astronomical
>> (defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons (defined by the WMO).
> 
> Wildly false dichotomy. There are a great many places where neither law
> nor custom observes either.

Out of curiosity: Name one.

>> Incidentally, your posting is an example for the human preference for
>> answers that are simple (and xenophobic) over answers that are correct.
> 
> "Xenophobic", forsooth? I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions.

How else should I interpret your emphasis on "Americans" IYHO preferring 
"answers that are definitive over answers that are right"?  I was not born 
and do not live in America (neither on/in one of the continents nor in the 
country which many of whose citizens call themselves "Americans") and I 
still find that argument at least not sound.  Could it be that we are 
observing the common "typical $fellow_countrymen" fallacy here?  Or is it 
something else, perhaps the equally common, xenophobia-driven "screw the 
former colonies" fallacy?


PointedEars
-- 
Use any version of Microsoft Frontpage to create your site.
(This won't prevent people from viewing your source, but no one
will want to steal it.)
  -- from <http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm> (404-comp.)
0
Thomas
9/3/2012 11:00:26 AM
In article <p1v51v6mvqu8.1so52xo4a77j3.dlg@40tude.net>,
 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:

> Be a little flexible, Warren: the 30th was the saint's day for Lima's Santa
> Rosa, and the 2nd was National Day in Vietnam, each of which is tantamount
> (in the right Southern Hemisphere culture) to a first day of Spring,
> n'est-ce pas :-) ?

Well, okay, but who moved Vietnam into the southron hemisphere? Today is 
Labo(u)r Day in North America except Mexico.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/3/2012 11:15:27 AM
In article <k21lqp$eu0$1@dont-email.me>,
 "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote:

> 2012-09-03 9:50, dorayme wrote:
> 
....
> > The way that still gets you into heaven is to use js but not to
> > *require* it and not to make it so your visitors *has* to have it or
> > else.
> 
> This used to be a good design principle, and it seems to have become 
> more popular, perhaps especially thanks to the kind person(s) who coined 
> a cool term for it: Unobtrusive JavaScript.
> 
> > In the case of a link that opens a js popup window when js is
> > on, and there are no other blockers, you have to fashion your links or
> > otherwise provide for the link to appear in a normal window or tab
> > when js is off.
> 
> That part is simple. You simply set up a normal link, possibly with 
> target="_blank", and then you start adding features without breaking 
> anything. ...
> 
> The tricky part is to check all the features of opening a window in 
> JavaScript, paying attention to browser differences in parameters and 
> default values. But that's off-topic here. The following illustrates 
> just the basic idea (of one possible approach) as fas as HTML is considered:
> 
> <a href="http://icant.co.uk/articles/seven-rules-of-unobtrusive-javascript/"
>    target="_blank" onclick=
>    "if(window.open) { window.open(this.href, '',
>     'width=680,height=700,resizable=1,scrollbars=1'); return false}"
>    >The seven rules of Unobtrusive JavaScript</a>
> 
> (The statement 'return false' aborts normal link processing, so that the 
> external page won't be opened twice.)

Yes, your code is excellent. I now recall having trouble with double 
link openings when I first used js windows with suitable graceful 
degradation. 

After having solved the problem to my satisfaction and providing 
pop-up windows, I later decided to make do without them. With php 
includes, it was easy to provide the visitor with the regular site 
navigational aids (permanent and local menus) with every page, 
lessening their chance of getting lost. Life suddenly got a lot easier!

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/3/2012 11:26:33 AM
In article <dorayme-DBAE5E.07560703092012@news.albasani.net>,
 dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article 
> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1209022104280.14864@badwlrz-clhri01.ws.lrz.de>,
>  Helmut Richter <hhr-m@web.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Warren Oates wrote:
> > 
> > > Also, it's well known that Shakespeare's play "Coriolis" was a tragedy 
> > > about star-crossed lovers whose seasons were reversed and who couldn't 
> > > come to terms with the different way the water went down their drains.
> > > 
> > > "Do you flush your jakes at me?"
> > 
> > That's Shakespeare? I would have expected:
> > "Flushest thou thy jakes at me?"
> 
> Yes, that is much more Shakespearian, more dramatically declarative.

I stole it from Romeo and Juliet:

ABRAHAM
Do you bite your thumb at us, sir?
SAMPSON
[Aside to GREGORY] Is the law of our side, if I say
ay?
GREGORY
No.
SAMPSON
No, sir, I do not bite my thumb at you, sir, but I
bite my thumb, sir.
GREGORY
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/3/2012 11:36:43 AM
On 2012-09-03 11:00:26 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:

> John W Kennedy wrote:
> 
>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>> On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:
>>>>> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would
>>>>>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day
>>>>>> to be in love!
>>>>> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>>>>> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>>>>> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but
>>>>> surely, dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just
>>>>> like ours?
>>>> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes and
>>>> solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American calendar
>>>> printers, persuant to the human (and especially American) preference
>>>> for answers that are definite over answers that are right. Many parts
>>>> of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait (badastronomy.com) and
>>>> others.
>>> 
>>> No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the astronomical
>>> (defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons (defined by the WMO).
>> 
>> Wildly false dichotomy. There are a great many places where neither law
>> nor custom observes either.
> 
> Out of curiosity: Name one.

Australia has already been mentioned. Sweden, Finland.... But most 
obviously you have forgotten that England's "Midsummer Day" falls on 
the Solstice.

>>> Incidentally, your posting is an example for the human preference for
>>> answers that are simple (and xenophobic) over answers that are correct.
>> 
>> "Xenophobic", forsooth? I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions.
> 
> How else should I interpret your emphasis on "Americans" IYHO preferring
> "answers that are definitive over answers that are right"?  I was not born
> and do not live in America (neither on/in one of the continents nor in the
> country which many of whose citizens call themselves "Americans") and I
> still find that argument at least not sound.  Could it be that we are
> observing the common "typical $fellow_countrymen" fallacy here?  Or is it
> something else, perhaps the equally common, xenophobia-driven "screw the
> former colonies" fallacy?

You are still jumping to the same false conclusion.

-- 
John W Kennedy
"Those in the seat of power oft forget their failings and seek only the 
obeisance of others!  Thus is bad government born!  Hold in your heart 
that you and the people are one, human beings all, and good government 
shall arise of its own accord!  Such is the path of virtue!"
  -- Kazuo Koike.  "Lone Wolf and Cub:  Thirteen Strings" (tr. Dana Lewis)

0
John
9/3/2012 4:44:02 PM
In comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html message <50435d8b$0$1544$c3e8da3$
92d0a893@news.astraweb.com>, Sun, 2 Sep 2012 09:22:09, Warren Oates
<warren.oates@gmail.com> posted:

>I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but surely,
>dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just like ours?

One needs to be careful about that.  If the equinoxes and solstices are
named in English, Spring Summer Autumn Winter, then they refer to the
local seasons, and so are opposite on different sides of the Tropics.
Within the Tropics, one relies on mere convention.

But if the equinoxes are named in Latin, particularly the Vernal
Equinox, they occur world-wide in the month of the corresponding event
in Rome.

Thus Easter can be said to be controlled by a nominal version of the
Vernal Equinox, even in the upside-down countries.

In a similar manner, the First Point of Aries (which is no longer in
Aries) is in the same place worldwide, even though to upside-downers the
crossing is apparently the other way.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.    ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk     Turnpike v6.05.
 Website  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
 PAS EXE etc. : <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/> - see in 00index.htm
 Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.
0
Dr
9/3/2012 6:25:44 PM
John W Kennedy wrote:

> On 2012-09-03 11:00:26 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>>>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>>> On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:
>>>>>> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you
>>>>>>> would hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no
>>>>>>> better day to be in love!
>>>>>> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>>>>>> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>>>>>> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but
>>>>>> surely, dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just
>>>>>> like ours?
>>>>> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes
>>>>> and solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American
>>>>> calendar printers, persuant to the human (and especially American)
>>>>> preference for answers that are definite over answers that are right.
>>>>> Many parts of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait
>>>>> (badastronomy.com) and others.
>>>> No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the
>>>> astronomical (defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons
>>>> (defined by the WMO).
>>> Wildly false dichotomy. There are a great many places where neither law
>>> nor custom observes either.
>> 
>> Out of curiosity: Name one.
> 
> Australia has already been mentioned.

No, with regard to your argument it has not.

> Sweden, Finland....

Ahh the Scandinavian and Baltic countries – where Midsummer (sv: Midsommar) 
is celebrated around and rooted in the *summer solstice* between June 20 and 
June 22?

> But most obviously you have forgotten that England's "Midsummer Day" falls
> on the Solstice.

That would be proving what, exactly?  That some holidays – particularly 
those rooted in Earth religions – actually do relate to the astronomical 
seasons, as I have stated?
 
>>>> Incidentally, your posting is an example for the human preference for
>>>> answers that are simple (and xenophobic) over answers that are correct.
>>> "Xenophobic", forsooth? I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions.
>> 
>> How else should I interpret your emphasis on "Americans" IYHO preferring
>> "answers that are definitive over answers that are right"?  I was not
>> born and do not live in America (neither on/in one of the continents nor
>> in the country which many of whose citizens call themselves "Americans")
>> and I still find that argument at least not sound.  Could it be that we
>> are observing the common "typical $fellow_countrymen" fallacy here?  Or
>> is it something else, perhaps the equally common, xenophobia-driven
>> "screw the former colonies" fallacy?
> 
> You are still jumping to the same false conclusion.

I am not concluding, I am theorizing and asking you.  And you have still not 
explained why you put emphasis on "Americans" there.  However, it is likely 
that you are not sufficiently able to; most types of xenophobia are rooted 
in the subconscious.


PointedEars
-- 
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
    navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
    && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
)  // Plone, register_function.js:16
0
Thomas
9/3/2012 8:09:57 PM
In article <2932435.HHlmUQDCBU@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> I am not concluding, I am theorizing and asking you.  And you have still not 
> explained why you put emphasis on "Americans" there.  However, it is likely 
> that you are not sufficiently able to; most types of xenophobia are rooted 
> in the subconscious.

Tell that to the French Canadians. They're the most racist xenophobes on 
the planet, and they think "mais, c'est normal, ça."
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/3/2012 9:42:42 PM
On 2012-09-03 20:09:57 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
> John W Kennedy wrote:
>> On 2012-09-03 11:00:26 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>>>>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>>>> On 2012-09-02 13:22:09 +0000, Warren Oates said:
>>>>>>> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you
>>>>>>>> would hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no
>>>>>>>> better day to be in love!
>>>>>>> I know that the seasons are reversed on your half of the planet (and
>>>>>>> that the water goes down the toilet the other way; the Coriolanus
>>>>>>> Affectation, I believe it's called; the Bard wrote about it) but
>>>>>>> surely, dorayme, your seasons follow the solstices and equinoxes just
>>>>>>> like ours?
>>>>>> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes
>>>>>> and solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American
>>>>>> calendar printers, persuant to the human (and especially American)
>>>>>> preference for answers that are definite over answers that are right.
>>>>>> Many parts of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait
>>>>>> (badastronomy.com) and others.
>>>>> No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the
>>>>> astronomical (defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons
>>>>> (defined by the WMO).
>>>> Wildly false dichotomy. There are a great many places where neither law
>>>> nor custom observes either.
>>> 
>>> Out of curiosity: Name one.
>> 
>> Australia has already been mentioned.
> 
> No, with regard to your argument it has not.
> 
>> Sweden, Finland....
> 
> Ahh the Scandinavian and Baltic countries – where Midsummer (sv: Midsommar)
> is celebrated around and rooted in the *summer solstice* between June 20 and
> June 22?
> 
>> But most obviously you have forgotten that England's "Midsummer Day" falls
>> on the Solstice.
> 
> That would be proving what, exactly?  That some holidays -- particularly
> those rooted in Earth religions -- actually do relate to the astronomical
> seasons, as I have stated?

So you affirm that having the solstice at midsummer and having it as 
the first day of summer are equivalent?

>>>>> Incidentally, your posting is an example for the human preference for 
>>>>> answers that are simple (and xenophobic) over answers that are correct.

>>>> "Xenophobic", forsooth? I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions.
>>> 
>>> How else should I interpret your emphasis on "Americans" IYHO preferring
>>> "answers that are definitive over answers that are right"?  I was not
>>> born and do not live in America (neither on/in one of the continents nor
>>> in the country which many of whose citizens call themselves "Americans")
>>> and I still find that argument at least not sound.  Could it be that we
>>> are observing the common "typical $fellow_countrymen" fallacy here?  Or
>>> is it something else, perhaps the equally common, xenophobia-driven
>>> "screw the former colonies" fallacy?
>> 
>> You are still jumping to the same false conclusion.
> 
> I am not concluding, I am theorizing and asking you.  And you have still not
> explained why you put emphasis on "Americans" there.  However, it is likely
> that you are not sufficiently able to; most types of xenophobia are rooted
> in the subconscious.

And /still/ gleefully leaping....

-- 
John W Kennedy
"Information is light. Information, in itself, about anything, is light."
  -- Tom Stoppard. "Night and Day"

0
John
9/3/2012 10:16:42 PM
Warren Oates wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> I am not concluding, I am theorizing and asking you.  And you have still
>> not explained why you put emphasis on "Americans" there.  However, it is
>> likely that you are not sufficiently able to; most types of xenophobia
>> are rooted in the subconscious.
> 
> Tell that to the French Canadians. They're the most racist xenophobes on
> the planet, and they think "mais, c'est normal, ça."

Incidentally, that in itself is a xenophobical, if not racist, statement.

Never assume that because most or all of the people that *you* have *met* 
from a group are representative of that group.  Put simply, there are idiots 
everywhere.  Unfortunately, proof by example is a common fallacy among 
humans.


F'up2 poster

PointedEars
-- 
> If you get a bunch of authors […] that state the same "best practices"
> in any programming language, then you can bet who is wrong or right...
Not with javascript. Nonsense propagates like wildfire in this field.
  -- Richard Cornford, comp.lang.javascript, 2011-11-14
0
Thomas
9/3/2012 10:19:34 PM
John W Kennedy wrote:

> On 2012-09-03 20:09:57 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>> On 2012-09-03 11:00:26 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>>>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
>>>>>> John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>>>>> No. The notion that the seasons exactly correspond to the equinoxes
>>>>>>> and solstices is a phantasy created for the benefit of American
>>>>>>> calendar printers, persuant to the human (and especially American)
>>>>>>> preference for answers that are definite over answers that are
>>>>>>> right. Many parts of the world are more sensible. See Phil Plait
>>>>>>> (badastronomy.com) and others.
>>>>>> No, it depends on whether by season one is referring to the
>>>>>> astronomical (defined by the IAU) or the meteorological seasons
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>>> (defined by the WMO).
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> Wildly false dichotomy. There are a great many places where neither
                                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> law nor custom observes either.
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> Out of curiosity: Name one.
>>> […] Sweden, Finland....
>> 
>> Ahh the Scandinavian and Baltic countries – where Midsummer (sv:
>> Midsommar) is celebrated around and rooted in the *summer solstice*
>> between June 20 and June 22?
>> 
>>> But most obviously you have forgotten that England's "Midsummer Day"
>>> falls on the Solstice.
>> 
>> That would be proving what, exactly?  That some holidays -- particularly
>> those rooted in Earth religions -- actually do relate to the astronomical
>> seasons, as I have stated?
> 
> So you affirm that having the solstice at midsummer and having it as
> the first day of summer are equivalent?

Of course not.  As the term midsummer (the *middle* of the summer) already 
suggests, the first day of astronomical summer on the northern hemisphere of 
the Earth lies halfway between the vernal equinox and the summer solstice.  
Which *again* disproves your argument, BTW.
 
>> I am not concluding, I am theorizing and asking you.  And you have still
>> not explained why you put emphasis on "Americans" there.  However, it is
>> likely that you are not sufficiently able to; most types of xenophobia
>> are rooted in the subconscious.
> 
> And /still/ gleefully leaping....

So explain it then or stop your musings about "Americans".  This is an 
international newsgroup and there is no need to create a hostile climate.


PointedEars
-- 
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
    navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
    && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
)  // Plone, register_function.js:16
0
Thomas
9/3/2012 10:34:27 PM
In article <2051492.Ugl3dWuGoM@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> 
> Incidentally, that in itself is a xenophobical, if not racist, statement.

French Canadians aren't a race. They're French-speaking white people 
(eurotrash, if you like).
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/3/2012 11:21:10 PM
In article <43447107.JDYPnQORfn@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> So explain it then or stop your musings about "Americans".  This is an 
> international newsgroup and there is no need to create a hostile climate.

I'm Welsh. My great grandfather stole sheep.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/3/2012 11:22:16 PM
On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 07:15:27 -0400, Warren Oates wrote:

> Well, okay, but who moved Vietnam into the southron hemisphere? 

Not me, surely :-) . But I'm confident there's a Vietnamese enclave or two
in Australia, somewhere -- Sydney, perhaps? or Brisbane? or Melbourne? Or
Perth, Broome, Adelaide, or Darwin? Or Cairns, perchance? Anyway, if not in
Australia, then in New Zealand, or in ... .

(Maybe dorayme can tell us :-) .)

> ... Today is 
> Labo(u)r Day in North America except Mexico.

'Tis indeed. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/4/2012 12:09:13 AM
On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 16:50:13 +1000, dorayme wrote:

> In article <zdhdz4fli2lv$.uzgcjxq1ykd9.dlg@40tude.net>,
>  tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 13:51:13 +1000, dorayme wrote:
>> 
>>>  ...
> 
>>> importantly, it has been undeprecated and resurrected formally or 
>>> kosherly for HTML5 
>> 
>> Halal now for HTML5? 
>>
> 
> I overheard a conversation between a local halal butcher and a 
> customer once in which the butcher was saying that halal meat is 
> similar in various important religious respects to kosher meat.

Quite so -- enough that even the most strictly observant Jewish Israelis
are quite content to consider Halal meats as perfectly Kosher.

>>> ... Well, unless your visitors are rather unusual, they will not have js 
>>> off. Actually, I think js pop windows are not all bad, but my 
>>> bodyguards have the day off today and so I better not elaborate.
>> 
>> Unusual is probably not they but I. I'd never think of requiring J-anything
>> of my visitors. Nor frames. Certainly never iFrames. But that's just me.
>>  
> 
> The way that still gets you into heaven is to use js but not to 
> *require* it and not to make it so your visitors *has* to have it or 
> else. In the case of a link that opens a js popup window when js is 
> on, and there are no other blockers, you have to fashion your links or 
> otherwise provide for the link to appear in a normal window or tab 
> when js is off.

Hell for me would be learning how to use js in the first place :-) .
 
>>> ... You have not mucked it up. Here the first day of spring and you would 
>>> hardly believe how clear are the skies. There could be no better day 
>>> to be in love!
>> 
>> Ahh :-) . And, to judge by your X-Face(*), no lovelier person to be in that
>> enviable state or condition, if I may say so.
>> 
> 
> The idea is that you can't tell anything from my x-face, I was ordered 
> to have one by an English gentleman recently.

I guess I'm seeing things that aren't there, then. Having visions, is that
called? Or hallucinating, perhaps? No matter, we're so far OT now ... :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
0
tlvp
9/4/2012 12:35:12 AM
In article <1kqbbmtpn4kwr.govf3o5dt9rv.dlg@40tude.net>,
 tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:

> But I'm confident there's a Vietnamese enclave or two
> in Australia, somewhere -- Sydney, perhaps? or Brisbane? or Melbourne? Or
> Perth, Broome, Adelaide, or Darwin? Or Cairns, perchance? Anyway, if not in
> Australia, then in New Zealand, or in ... .
> 
> (Maybe dorayme can tell us :-)

I can tell you there are parts of Sydney that have large particular 
ethnic concentrations and I love going to the various ones for the 
food and the stores. There are many suburbs, especially inner city 
ones, with great mixes. But if you go to the ethnically concentrated 
areas, you can find cheaper and even more authentic family cooking. 

In Marrackville, an inner city Sydney suburb, there is a large number 
of Viet restaurants, many in one very long street. All are cheap. 
There is one that is *really* good. Naturally, I won't say which,  
because it will lessen the chances of my being able to get a table. 

To tell you the truth, I am even reluctant to tell a partner, I insist 
on them blindfolded while walking and eating and leaving there. Not 
anyway kinky, the truth is simply that it is a practical precaution.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
9/4/2012 12:46:36 AM
Warren Oates wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> Incidentally, that in itself is a xenophobical, if not racist, statement.
> 
> French Canadians aren't a race. They're French-speaking white people
> (eurotrash, if you like).

"Eurotrash" is another of those words I would rather not read, in particular 
here.  If "xenophobical" or "racist" does not apply to that then, I am sure 
that you can use a dictionary to find a more proper term in English for the 
distasteful disdain of *all* people of an ethnic group because of a few bad 
examples, which you are displaying here.


Score adjusted

F'up2 PointedEars
-- 
> If you get a bunch of authors […] that state the same "best practices"
> in any programming language, then you can bet who is wrong or right...
Not with javascript. Nonsense propagates like wildfire in this field.
  -- Richard Cornford, comp.lang.javascript, 2011-11-14
0
Thomas
9/4/2012 1:23:09 AM
Warren Oates wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> So explain it then or stop your musings about "Americans".  This is an
>> international newsgroup and there is no need to create a hostile climate.
> 
> I'm Welsh. My great grandfather stole sheep.

That is a statement, but not an explanation, and you are the wrong person to 
give it in this case anyway.


PointedEars
-- 
    realism:    HTML 4.01 Strict
    evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
    madness:    XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
                                                    -- Bjoern Hoehrmann
0
Thomas
9/4/2012 1:25:14 AM
In article <6448465.xOFk12JCjL@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> Score adjusted

Aren't you going to add injury minutes? Insult to injury minutes?

I'm still not gonna send you email.

FU to poster.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/4/2012 10:51:53 AM
In comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html message <50449158$0$1463$c3e8da3$
12bcf670@news.astraweb.com>, Mon, 3 Sep 2012 07:15:27, Warren Oates
<warren.oates@gmail.com> posted:

>In article <p1v51v6mvqu8.1so52xo4a77j3.dlg@40tude.net>,
> tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Be a little flexible, Warren: the 30th was the saint's day for Lima's Santa
>> Rosa, and the 2nd was National Day in Vietnam, each of which is tantamount
>> (in the right Southern Hemisphere culture) to a first day of Spring,
>> n'est-ce pas :-) ?
>
>Well, okay, but who moved Vietnam into the southron hemisphere? Today is
>Labo(u)r Day in North America except Mexico.

You appear to have forgotten Greenland.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.    ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk     Turnpike v6.05.
 Website  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
 PAS EXE etc. : <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/> - see in 00index.htm
 Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.
0
Dr
9/4/2012 7:38:57 PM
In article <Q27LEgFRjlRQFwCw@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid>,
 Dr J R Stockton <reply1236@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

> 
> You appear to have forgotten Greenland.

I had no idea. Learn something new every day. Except that it's in the 
spring.
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
Warren
9/5/2012 3:50:43 AM
Reply: