Augmenting Types

G

Garrett Smith

Jorge said:
Mobile IE ? Are you serious ? That's the worst IE ever ! even worse
than desktop IE ! (wait, is that possible ?)

And S60 === a badly broken, buggy fork of webkit. Still, much better
than any mobile IE.

The truth is that the first serious, decent browser ever on a
smartphone has been mobile Safari. No matter what you say or how much
you hate Apple and everything Apple. That's not my personal opinion,
it's a fact, it's history.

You can compare Mobile Safari to windows mobile or Nokia S60, but that
does not change chronology and it doesn't make what Apple said true.
Mobile Safari was not the first browser on a smartphone. It was
certainly the most hyped up ever.

Windows Mobile could run DHTML stuff way back in around I think 2001 or so.
Assuming you mean e.g. overflow-x:hidden; , which version does not
support that ?

overflow scroll or auto doesn't work.
Does not need to as there's no mouse in the iPhone :)

There is no mouse here on my laptop. The event name containing "mouse"
is misfortunate. Renaming the event to "pointer", while
well-intentioned, was impractical.
They are in their own right. And they have *not* said a word (yet)
about the licensing fees (if any). It could be licensed for free (and
eventually it could even become an w3 standard, then)
*but*only*if*Apple*wanted*... :)

The w3c individuals might actually be so misguided as to adopt such a
badly designed Touch Events API. It that is really an awful API to use
and is also totally unnecessary. Mouse events could work just fine if
Apple had not designed a browser where drag events scrolls the window.
Fennec ? What's Fennec ?

http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=Fennec&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Fennec's a cute littlel animal with big floppy ears. Fennec is a mobile
Firefox that's gonna run on a bunch of browsers. It will not run on
Apple iPhone because Apple forbids that.

Any application for iPhone must be approved by Apple and must also be
sold on Apple store. Apple charges the developer for this. Want to make
a free application for your friends? You need to pay Apple for that.
 
G

Garrett Smith

Garrett said:
[...]

Fennec's a cute littlel animal with big floppy ears. Fennec is a mobile
Firefox that's gonna run on a bunch of browsers.

gonna run on a bunch of phones, not browsers. Fennec *is* a browser.
 
J

Jorge

You can compare Mobile Safari to windows mobile or Nokia S60, but that
does not change chronology and it doesn't make what Apple said true.
Mobile Safari was not the first browser on a smartphone. It was
certainly the most hyped up ever.

It's been the first ever serious browser in a smartphone that was
designed with the clear and sole intention to browse the real web and
not that wap or "mobile web" crap that every other previous "WAP
browsers" were designed for.
Windows Mobile could run DHTML stuff way back in around I think 2001 or so.

LOL, even today -desktop (!)- IEs struggle to achieve that.
There is no mouse here on my laptop.

Yes there is. It's that small arrow that moves around in the screen.

The w3c individuals might actually be so misguided as to adopt such a
badly designed Touch Events API.

Where's one that's better ? Where's one -another- at all ?
It that is really an awful API to use
and is also totally unnecessary.

Because you say so ?
Mouse events could work just fine if
Apple had not designed a browser where drag events scrolls the window.

Surely that's why everybody else is trying to copy the iPhone's
"awful" design and UI.

And scroll events can be trapped (as touches) before the scroll
occurs.
Fennec's a cute littlel animal with big floppy ears. Fennec is a mobile
Firefox that's gonna run on a bunch of browsers.

Ah. That. That's good news. Really. I'm glad it's finally out. I
appreciate mozilla very much.
It will not run on
Apple iPhone because Apple forbids that.

There are other browsers in the iPhone already (e.g. icab). Probably
if mozilla just leaves out the plugins it could very well by approved
for the app store.
Any application for iPhone must be approved by Apple and must also be
sold on Apple store.

Of course. The same goes for the xboxes and wiis and playstations and
nokias and ... and ...
Apple charges the developer for this.

That's not true.
Want to make a free application for your friends? You need to pay Apple
False.

for that.

Not for that. You pay to become a registered developer, not to publish
an App. Free Apps are published for free and paid apps pay just a
small % to Apple. And it's not the developer who pays, it's the buyer:
the developer only earns, always.
 
D

David Mark

It's been the first ever serious browser in a smartphone that was
designed with the clear and sole intention to browse the real web and
not that wap or "mobile web" crap that every other previous "WAP
browsers" were designed for.


LOL, even today -desktop (!)- IEs struggle to achieve that.

What does that mean? Oh, you mean _you_ struggle with IE? For those
who have been paying attention for the last decade or so, it's a piece
of cake.
Yes there is. It's that small arrow that moves around in the screen.

No, that's the _pointer_.
Where's one that's better ? Where's one -another- at all ?

There's no _need_ for it.
Because you say so ?

A lot of people say so. :)
Surely that's why everybody else is trying to copy the iPhone's
"awful" design and UI.

Are they?! I know some misguided Web developers have decided to mimic
the UI for mobile offshoots, but that's pretty backwards when the
whole point is the phone can display normal layouts.
And scroll events can be trapped (as touches) before the scroll
occurs.

And that's a bad idea too. Think.
Ah. That. That's good news. Really. I'm glad it's finally out. I
appreciate mozilla very much.

Great.
 
G

Garrett Smith

Jorge said:
It's been the first ever serious browser in a smartphone that was
designed with the clear and sole intention to browse the real web and
not that wap or "mobile web" crap that every other previous "WAP
browsers" were designed for.


LOL, even today -desktop (!)- IEs struggle to achieve that.


Yes there is. It's that small arrow that moves around in the screen.



Where's one that's better ? Where's one -another- at all ?


Because you say so ?

Sure. I'm qualified to say that. No? I have developed an API for YUI
Test specifically for testing Touch Events. It's on my github if you
want to check it out.

I have provided reasons for why the API is awful. Regarldess, the worst
problem is that normal mousemove event does not work.
Surely that's why everybody else is trying to copy the iPhone's
"awful" design and UI.

They are copying the business that makes money.
And scroll events can be trapped (as touches) before the scroll
occurs.

As far as I have tested, mousemove event does not fire. What do you mean
by "trap" a scroll event?
Ah. That. That's good news. Really. I'm glad it's finally out. I
appreciate mozilla very much.


There are other browsers in the iPhone already (e.g. icab). Probably
if mozilla just leaves out the plugins it could very well by approved
for the app store.

I was not aware of icab on iPhone.
Of course. The same goes for the xboxes and wiis and playstations and
nokias and ... and ...

No, not for all devices. Even if that were true, it wouldn't make one
individual company following the others any more right.

I believe Palm allows free (unregulated) application installations. I
don't keep up with xbox. I hate video games more than I hate the mobile
indusgry, but mobile is realate to the Internet, so related to my
profession.
 
G

Garrett Smith

David said:
What does that mean? Oh, you mean _you_ struggle with IE? For those
who have been paying attention for the last decade or so, it's a piece
of cake.

Let's call it "fudge" (and leave that open for personal interpretation).

IE is a piece of fudge.

;-)
No, that's the _pointer_.

Browser anatomy 099.
There's no _need_ for it.

There is a reason for it. I believe this reason is not technical, but
related to business, which is regulated by law.
A lot of people say so. :)

Have you tried using the API? The createTouchEventis 18 or so parameter
variables. Three of those params are TouchList objects. Each TouchList
object consists of one or more TOuch Objects. To dispatch a Touch Event,
one must create, at a minimum, Three TouchList, Three Touch, and call
the 18 parameter variable createTouchEvent method.

That API borrows the worst parts of DOM Events and expands on them.
Are they?! I know some misguided Web developers have decided to mimic
the UI for mobile offshoots, but that's pretty backwards when the
whole point is the phone can display normal layouts.

Nokia is. Nokia and Apple are suing each other constantly. It is a
nasty, nasty business.

I got caught up in bringing out some truth on w3c list and got banned by
Nokia's representative Arthur Barstow, permanently, for using the word
"misguided individuals", plus some other falsehoods he provided in
trying to justify that. He also lied and said it was a two-week ban, but
in fact it was permanent. Doesn't matter much, really. Once they start
making false accusations and taking actions against those falseactions,
there really isn't a rational end to such irrational behavior.
 
D

David Mark

Garrett said:
Let's call it "fudge" (and leave that open for personal interpretation).

IE is a piece of fudge.

;-)

But very manageable fudge for those who take the time to figure it out.
;) The snail's pace of its evolution was a positive boon that was
thrown away by "cool" libraries that never came close to accounting for
IE's quirks (e.g. attributes, ActiveX, box model differences, etc.)
It's amazing as IE was the one they should have been focusing on (the
rest converged with standards years earlier). Now the failures want to
blame IE for their troubles and throw out "support" for anything but
IE8. Of course, IE8 has more than one face...
Browser anatomy 099.

Yes, I sometimes wonder if "Jorge" understands anything he writes.
There is a reason for it. I believe this reason is not technical, but
related to business, which is regulated by law.
Yes.


Have you tried using the API? The createTouchEventis 18 or so parameter
variables. Three of those params are TouchList objects. Each TouchList
object consists of one or more TOuch Objects. To dispatch a Touch Event,
one must create, at a minimum, Three TouchList, Three Touch, and call
the 18 parameter variable createTouchEvent method.

I've never bothered and have written several Web apps aimed at the
iPhone. The touch events are best left to the browser (i.e. for
scrolling the window).
That API borrows the worst parts of DOM Events and expands on them.

Yes, it's God-awful.
Nokia is. Nokia and Apple are suing each other constantly. It is a
nasty, nasty business.

Yes. Most businesses are (nasty).
I got caught up in bringing out some truth on w3c list and got banned by
Nokia's representative Arthur Barstow, permanently, for using the word
"misguided individuals", plus some other falsehoods he provided in
trying to justify that.

Yes, I am familiar with such head-in-the-sand strategies (see jQuery).
What sort of idiot "bans" individual posters for _everybody_ when those
who wish to ignore them can simply ignore them? And what sort of
children cry for such bans? I can't even imagine what these people are
like in real life. :)
He also lied and said it was a two-week ban, but
in fact it was permanent.

A two-week ban?! Who does this guy think he is and what could he
possibly hope to accomplish with such loony-tunes antics?
Doesn't matter much, really. Once they start
making false accusations and taking actions against those falseactions,
there really isn't a rational end to such irrational behavior.

Yes, participating in online forums is often a surreal experience.
 
J

Jorge

(...)
Sure. I'm qualified to say that. No? I have developed an API for YUI
Test specifically for testing Touch Events. (...)

Let me ask, what other touch/gestures JS APIs are out there ?
I have provided reasons for why the API is awful.

When, where ?
Regarldess, the worst
problem is that normal mousemove event does not work.

It's "generated" after certain user actions (touches/gestures), but as
there's no mouse to track there can't be a normal mousemove.
They are copying the business that makes money.

And copying the phone that set the bar.
As far as I have tested, mousemove event does not fire. What do you mean
by "trap" a scroll event?

You said: "if Apple had not designed a browser where drag events
scrolls the window"
I say: if you capture the touch event you can prevent/cancel the
scroll action.
I was not aware of icab on iPhone.

The iPhone isn't the most interesting target for mozilla's mobile
browser, there's a whole lot of other very nice phones crying out loud
for a good browser while the iPhone's got already a pretty good one,
since the start.
No, not for all devices. Even if that were true, it wouldn't make one
individual company following the others any more right.

I believe Palm allows free (unregulated) application installations.

It used to be so with their PDAs I believe. Don't know about the Pre
and webOs. (whose apps are written in JS :)
 
G

Garrett Smith

Jorge said:
Let me ask, what other touch/gestures JS APIs are out there ?

RIM and Palm uses just mouseevents, though they don't fire mousemove
either.These guys copied Apple in making what would be mousemove to
perform a scroll.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.../9c500b1523fc7d9b?show_docid=9c500b1523fc7d9b

See 0 answers there.
When, where ?

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/0169.html
| * initTouchEvent takes 18 parameter variables. Three of these
| variables are "TouchList" variables. Each TouchList is comprised of
|one or more Touch instances. Was a simpler API considered?
|
| * the TouchEvent payload for the eventListener does not have the
| interesting data itself. Instead, the interesting data is on the
| "changedTouches" TouchList. The callback must address this complexity
| by hanling not only a touch event, but a touch event which is not
|directly useful (the information the program needs is in the touches
| or changedTouches).


In response to Nokia's "Kari Hitola" suggesting we have "real discussion":-

| > Let’s hope that now there could be a real discussion about the
| topic.
|
| [snip]
|
| A "real discussion"?
|
| I would think that would include identifing problems and have them
| post the problems with a few alternatives.
|
| A productive discussion would include reasons and insight to the
| design of touch event, including problem scenario and proposed
| solution.
|
| The one known existing api (Apple's) for touch event has not been
| justified (and justificaiton for specific parts was directly asked, by
| me, above, in this trhead).

We never got any justification for the API, but Kari followed up with
some statements that were shown to be false. He followed up with:-

| Garrett's and my objectives were actually quite different.

and:-

| Sorry for sounding like a broken record, and trying to sell our
| manipulation event too much.

*My* objective is writing applications that don't have separate
codebases for each special touch events API. I am selling nothing. I am
sorry for nothing.

* retrofitting existing drag 'n drop code (APE)
* modifying existing event simulation framework code (YUI2)

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/0192.html

| The APIs for simulation and for handling event callback are both
| complicated. Simulation includes 18 parameter variables, plus all of
| the key modifiers, like ctrlKey, metaKey (how the user is supposed do
| that off is beyond me). It includes a pageX (nonstandard). It includes
| screenX (can't explain the rationale for that one). It could easily
| work in a compatible way so that the event properties of the actual
| event would "work" for most touch events.
|
| I am aware that Apple has rotation and scaling. Must these necessarily
| be coupled to the input device ("touch")? Could the rotation/scale be
| independent of that (much like a contextmenu event is independent of
| the input device or method that that device triggers it (recall old
| mac IE, where click-hold caused a context menu to appear).


SOmewhere in that thread I asked if some proposal had come from
"(misguided) individuals in Nokia USA". That, and some mistruths, were
used to justify permanently banning me from w3c public webapps.

I don't mind being banned; it doesn't *personally* affect me. The w3c
providing preferential treatment to its paying members' business needs,
while turning against developers is disturbing.

I'm not making any excuses or apologies. I'm not saying I'm mr nice guy
or joe happy, but I am speaking out the truth, and that is something
that those w3c sponsors cannot enjoy.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/dbcce101c82730a1?dmode=source

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/0182.html

http://yuilibrary.com/projects/yui2/ticket/2528514
It's "generated" after certain user actions (touches/gestures), but as
there's no mouse to track there can't be a normal mousemove.

It could. A mousemove event could fire and then, whatever else they
want. Sort of like domActivate would fire and click would fire and focus
would fire, all ased on the same user-initiated "click".

The design of publish and subscribe is a well-known pattern. It is easy
to undertand and widely implemented in many languages (DOM Events, for
example).

So not only can mousemove be generated, it should be. The pointing
device is either a finger or stylus and when it moves, the mousemove
should fire.

Mousemove events sometimes need to know the event coords where the event
occurred. The clientX property provides this information. Surprisingly,
it is missing from TouchEvent.

[copyright Garrett Smith:
Multiple mouse events requires only one small modification to the API,
and that is to add an `id` property to the event.

Other events may fire at the same time, but these other events are not
tied directly to the mouseevent.

- end copyright Garrett Smith]

Apples touchEvents, in contrast:-

Apple's patented API for creating a single touch.

Touch createTouch( in DOMWindow view, in EventTarget target,
in long identifier, in long pageX, in long pageY,
in long screenX, in long screenY)
raises ( DOMException);

To create a TouchList, at least one Touch must be created.

To create a TouchEvent, it is necessary to first create three TouchList,
each of which needs at least one Touch.

I don't want that. I don't like the DOM API (it is awful in the same
way), but this is taking that to perverse extremes.

I want something like:-

dispatchEvent(target, {clientX: 10, clientY: 12 /*,...*/});

Last I proposed that, it was responded to by FUD "its impossible to
determine the contents of an opaque object" and then Cameron McCormack's
suggestion of instead changing all the dom event properties from
readonly to read/write. When I pointed out that it would result in
errors as:-

var x = document.createEvent("click");
x.clientX = 12; // Script Error: Never try to set a readonly property!

He followed up that the API could change, though did not provide any
suggestion that it would be important to feature test these readability
of these features, nor did he provide any strategy for what a client
would do when that failed.

Then we had Schepers come with some sort of global object inference
feature checker that accepts a string and returns a boolean. Sounds
great but I would not trust that; I would trust what I can test, not
what the browser says works. The code that the browser uses to perform
the task would likely not be the same code that reports whether or not
that task can be done. The likelihood of a browser misreporting feature
support seems fairly high.
And copying the phone that set the bar.


You said: "if Apple had not designed a browser where drag events
scrolls the window"
I say: if you capture the touch event you can prevent/cancel the
scroll action.


The iPhone isn't the most interesting target for mozilla's mobile
browser, there's a whole lot of other very nice phones crying out loud
for a good browser while the iPhone's got already a pretty good one,
since the start.

MOzilla is a great open source project. Why should Mozilla developers
pay to distribute the application?

The business situation with Mozilla is complicated and beyond my
understanding. Google funds Mozilla and now Google has their own Phone
coming out (Nexus One).
http://www.google.com/phone

You'll have the opportunity to actually buy the phone, not stuck with
greedy, lying phone carriers (they're even worse than cable companies).

I just tried to view a web page and got into "text selection" mode, with
those little blue dots.

Well the web browser is only part of the phone. IT is a bad part, but
then, so are all the other parts.

It has a bad camera, isn't very sturdy, has a horrible speaker (i like
speaker phone when I am on hold), it does not cradle like a clamshell,
and the buttons are nearly impossible to use.

There isn't any one task that hte iPhone is acually good at.
It used to be so with their PDAs I believe. Don't know about the Pre
and webOs. (whose apps are written in JS :)

Yes, I am aware of that. Palm Pre in HTML5.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

Garrett said:
Thomas said:
kangax said:
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
kangax wrote:
There is *nothing* in the Specification that says that Function
instances are not [[Construct]]able by default. In fact, function
instances/objects do have by default an internal [[Construct]]
property. (13.2)
Aren't we talking about built-in functions? What do Function instances
have to do with this?

If you had cared to read the definitions I quoted ...
However, in any case the statement "None of the built in functions may
be used as a constructor." is not only incomplete; it is obviously
_wrong_. As the statement is an existential negation, to prove it
wrong I need only one counter-example:

var o = new Object();
How is this a proof?

`Object' is a built-in function.

What do you think the Object Constructor is?

See above. The ECMAScript Language Specification (Editions 3 and 5,
section 15, in particular 15.2) and `typeof' (implementations, per ES3+5,
11.4.3) agree.¹
Why do you think the specification calls it "The Object Constructor"?

Let's see -- why would I think that something called "Constructor" is
called so -- maybe because it can be "used in a `new' expression" (ES3+5,
4.2.1) to "create and initialize an object" (ES3+5, 4.3.4, 15.2.2)?

You still appear to miss the point: Your statement is wrong because it
is too general.

Or you need to ask smarter questions.


HTH

PointedEars
___________
¹ Would you like the next release of the ECMAScript Support Matrix
(<http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>) to show the numbers of the
sections a particular language feature is specified by, in the
"ECMAScript" column, for faster reference? (Suggestions welcome.)
 
E

Eric Bednarz

kangax said:
IIRC, IE introduced `hasOwnProperty` starting with 5.5,

Are you talking about IE or JScript?
so 5.0 and
lower don't have it.

Probably IE, because there is also no hasOwnProperty in JScript 5.1.
If *IE* 5.0 has it or not is uncertain until you test it. My IE 5.0 on
Windows 2000 certainly has it because I run system updates and the
JScript version is 5.6.
 
G

Garrett Smith

kangax said:
Well, that's the one I have. 5.2.3 (5815.1)

Surprisingly, it seems to be working on Snow Leopard just fine.

It is missing in my MacIE 5.23 (that's 5.23, not 5.2.3).

Try javascript:alert(ScriptEngineBuildVerion())

What does it say?

I have build 3715 and `hasOwnProperty` is absent.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top