Curiously, if you add an onclick event to an anchor in IE7, the anchor remains in the CSS :active state regardless of whether the javascript returns true or false. It’ll stay in this state untill you click on another element on the page.
e.g.
<!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <style type="text/css"> a:active { background-color:red; } </style> </head> <body> <a href="#" onclick="javascript:return true;">Click me</a>
</body> </html>
/**
* This replaces the default MooTools more Depender.request function to use
* HTTP "get" rather than "post".
*
* When sending requests for files via the depender, I was finding that Safari
* wasn't getting and re-evaluating them the second time I visited the page.
* This was because an etag was sent with each script.
*
* Safari responds to etags properly and adds "If-None-Match" and
* "If-Modified-Since" headers to another request for the same file. This makes
* Apache respond with a 412 status (Precondition Failed) as it should do for
* "post" requests (according to RFC 2616).
*
* Unfortunately Safari doesn't then deal with the 412 as it does with a 304
* (Not Modified). It doesn't grab what it has in the cache and put it in the
* response, it gives you nothing.
*
* For "get" requests, Apache has to respond with a 304, or 200 or whatever, but
* not 412. So we change the request method so we don't have to deal with 412.
*/
Depender.request = function(url, callback){
new Request.JSON({
url: url,
secure: false,
onSuccess: callback,
method:'get'
}).send();
};
Why doesn’t IE7 assume I want to use HTTP as my communications protocol? IE6 seemed to be able to, FF, Opera and Safari seems to be able to. For pete’s sake, you’re a web browser! What other bloody protocol do you normally use? If I were ever to type anything in the address bar, and I didn’t specify http://, ftp://, file:// etc., the chances are that, in actual fact, I really, actually, meant, http://, surely?
Whilst working with IE6 recently, ha, sorry I mean against IE6 – I found that a number of times I was asking (read: wishing) when support for this horrendous browser would be dropped. According to http://cmsreport.com/node/1812, support could be dropped when mainstream support for XP is dropped. Wouldn’t that be great? But hang on, isn’t everyone doing their best to avoid upgrading to Vista, hoping that M$ doesn’t drop support, or even stop allowing new PCs to be shipped with it until Windows 8? It seems that we have a bit of a conflict of interest here, meaning I don’t think there is a way of getting rid of IE6 whilst keeping XP – which is annoying, to say the least.
Adobe why? I formatted my Mac as case sensitive HFS+ because, well, lets face it, capital letters are different from lower case letters. Imagine how disappointed I felt when I got round to installing Flash on my case sensitive filesystem. It didn’t help that it was the last thing I did after installing leopard and setting up my files and applications, since there doesn’t seem to be a way of converting case sensitive HFS+ to case insensitive HFS+.
Luckily for me, Adobe wrote a helpful tech note on this issue, and by ‘helpful’ I actually mean jaw droppingly unhelpful.
Was I asking for trouble?
You are currently browsing the archives for the Grinds My Gears category.
