This is a stupid question, but hopefully someone here can help

Discussion in 'HTML' started by WookieTim@gmail.com, Aug 25, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I have a java applet that allows the user to enter HTML into a textarea
    field. Pretty standard stuff. But I am also using Javascript to emulate
    a tabbed interface. Each of the pages, of which one is the page that
    contains the Java Applet, is in a table row that has it's Display style
    property flipped form "none" to "Table-Row" as the user goes form tab
    to tab.

    The problem I am seeing is that the java applet reloads every time the
    user goes to that tab, which I don't want - it loses all of the text
    the user has entered and goes blank. Is there a possibility that my
    switching the display property is doing this and if so, how do I fix it?
     
    , Aug 25, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. numberwhun Guest

    Being of the belief that the stupid question is the one not asked, this
    isn't so stupid. Of course I will say that I think this may be more of a
    question for a Java newsgroup rather than HTML. I could be wrong, but that
    is my opinion.

    Regards,

    jlk

    wrote:

    > I have a java applet that allows the user to enter HTML into a textarea
    > field. Pretty standard stuff. But I am also using Javascript to emulate
    > a tabbed interface. Each of the pages, of which one is the page that
    > contains the Java Applet, is in a table row that has it's Display style
    > property flipped form "none" to "Table-Row" as the user goes form tab
    > to tab.
    >
    > The problem I am seeing is that the java applet reloads every time the
    > user goes to that tab, which I don't want - it loses all of the text
    > the user has entered and goes blank. Is there a possibility that my
    > switching the display property is doing this and if so, how do I fix it?
     
    numberwhun, Aug 27, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. numberwhun wrote:
    > Being of the belief that the stupid question is the one not asked, this
    > isn't so stupid.


    Nope, got to disagree with you here. This is a pretty stupid question.
    (as questions go)

    > > I have a java applet that allows the user to enter HTML into a textarea
    > > field. Pretty standard stuff.


    why of course, pretty standard...

    > > But I am also using Javascript to emulate
    > > a tabbed interface. Each of the pages, of which one is the page that
    > > contains the Java Applet, is in a table row that has it's Display style
    > > property flipped form "none" to "Table-Row" as the user goes form tab
    > > to tab.
    > >
    > > The problem I am seeing...


    Wait!!!! There's the problem!! YOU are seeing the problem. WE are
    not because you didn't give us a URL....
     
    Travis Newbury, Aug 27, 2006
    #3
  4. numberwhun <> scripsit:

    > Being of the belief that the stupid question is the one not asked,
    > this isn't so stupid.


    Remember that there are no stupid questions, there are just stupid people.

    Hint: You might look less stupid if you spent a few minutes in learning how
    to post to Usenet. Actually, reading a group for a day or too and looking
    how clever people post might suffice.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 27, 2006
    #4
  5. dorayme Guest

    In article <EgiIg.84$XK4.10@trndny07>, numberwhun <>
    wrote:

    > Being of the belief that the stupid question is the one not asked, this
    > isn't so stupid. Of course I will say that I think this may be more of a
    > question for a Java newsgroup rather than HTML. I could be wrong, but that
    > is my opinion.


    This is extremely daring thinking of yours...

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Aug 28, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    1. There is no group that relates to a problem in the intersection of
    HTML and Java - and that is exactly where this problem lay.
    2. After all the help on this forum (Sarcasm), I figured it out on my
    own. I guess I wasn't so "Stupid" after all.
    3. For anyone else who might see this problem in the future :
    Firefox requires the display property to be switched between
    "None" and "Table-Row" to dynamically display table rows.
    IE, on the other hand, requires switching between "None" and
    "Inline" (Or "Block") to do this.
    Java, when in a div or table row that has had it's display style
    switched to "none" will reload as if the page it is on has just been
    reloaded.
    The way around these problems is to not put the java applet into a
    table row that will be dynamically displayed or not. Put it in a DIV
    element that has it's "Visibility" style dynamically tweaked, and use
    absolute positioning to put it in the right place.

    Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    > numberwhun <> scripsit:
    >
    > > Being of the belief that the stupid question is the one not asked,
    > > this isn't so stupid.

    >
    > Remember that there are no stupid questions, there are just stupid people.
    >
    > Hint: You might look less stupid if you spent a few minutes in learning how
    > to post to Usenet. Actually, reading a group for a day or too and looking
    > how clever people post might suffice.
    >
    > --
    > Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    > http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    , Aug 31, 2006
    #6
  7. wrote:
    > 1. There is no group that relates to a problem in the intersection of
    > HTML and Java - and that is exactly where this problem lay.


    Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.

    > 2. After all the help on this forum (Sarcasm), I figured it out on my
    > own. I guess I wasn't so "Stupid" after all.


    Fine, however how do you expect anyone to reasonably diagnose your
    problem with what you offered for evidenced? Certainly not a URL or code
    to so we can actually see what you are doing! It is like calling a
    doctor over the phone and saying, "Doctor it hurts when I do this".

    Just saying I have a Java applet and some JavaScript and a webpage and
    this happens, be real!

    > 3. For anyone else who might see this problem in the future :
    > Firefox requires the display property to be switched between
    > "None" and "Table-Row" to dynamically display table rows.
    > IE, on the other hand, requires switching between "None" and
    > "Inline" (Or "Block") to do this.


    With respect to what markup? So I assume that your JavaScript (that you
    did not show) on a page (that you did not reference) is changing the CSS
    of some elements (that we cannot see) on this page (we also cannot see)
    is used to create a 'tabbed' interface?

    > Java, when in a div or table row that has had it's display style
    > switched to "none" will reload as if the page it is on has just been
    > reloaded.
    > The way around these problems is to not put the java applet into a
    > table row that will be dynamically displayed or not. Put it in a DIV
    > element that has it's "Visibility" style dynamically tweaked, and use
    > absolute positioning to put it in the right place.
    >


    If you think honestly about the thread that you have created you might
    see why the regulars can get a little cynical.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Aug 31, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest

    > Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    > that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    > of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    > *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.
    >


    Let's see... Jukka proceeded to say that there were no stupid questions
    just stupid people, then proceeded to tell me to look less "Stupid".
    Yeah - that's really a great direct response to my question.

    > Fine, however how do you expect anyone to reasonably diagnose your
    > problem with what you offered for evidenced? Certainly not a URL or code
    > to so we can actually see what you are doing! It is like calling a
    > doctor over the phone and saying, "Doctor it hurts when I do this".
    >
    > Just saying I have a Java applet and some JavaScript and a webpage and
    > this happens, be real!
    >


    The question was asked in regard to whether Java Applets completely
    reload when the style property of the <Div> element they are on has
    it's "Display" property changed. This is a rather simple question and
    should not need a whole lot of code - it was being asked whether anyone
    had seen this problem before. It turns out that it is not specific to
    my code but general accross all Javascript/HTML code.


    > With respect to what markup? So I assume that your JavaScript (that you
    > did not show) on a page (that you did not reference) is changing the CSS
    > of some elements (that we cannot see) on this page (we also cannot see)
    > is used to create a 'tabbed' interface?
    >


    After the reception I recieved to my original post, why should I share
    code with you? If someone had ASKED, perhaps. However, I was
    immediately called stupid by multiple people. Perhaps next time, rather
    than say "You are stupid you should show us code" people in this group
    could say "Could you please share a representative bit of code so we
    can diagnose the problem?"
     
    , Sep 2, 2006
    #8
  9. wrote:
    >> Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    >> that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    >> of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    >> *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.
    >>

    >
    > Let's see... Jukka proceeded to say that there were no stupid questions
    > just stupid people, then proceeded to tell me to look less "Stupid".
    > Yeah - that's really a great direct response to my question.


    Yes, just underscored my point. When you stop top posting it clarifies
    your response. Secondly if you look at Jukka's post the individual that
    he was implying was stupid was *numberwhun* not *you*. It was numberwhun
    who top posting he was commenting on, but maybe you should heed his
    advice ;-)

    >
    >> Fine, however how do you expect anyone to reasonably diagnose your
    >> problem with what you offered for evidenced? Certainly not a URL or code
    >> to so we can actually see what you are doing! It is like calling a
    >> doctor over the phone and saying, "Doctor it hurts when I do this".
    >>
    >> Just saying I have a Java applet and some JavaScript and a webpage and
    >> this happens, be real!
    >>

    >
    > The question was asked in regard to whether Java Applets completely
    > reload when the style property of the <Div> element they are on has
    > it's "Display" property changed. This is a rather simple question and
    > should not need a whole lot of code - it was being asked whether anyone
    > had seen this problem before. It turns out that it is not specific to
    > my code but general accross all Javascript/HTML code.
    >


    Actually your said "in a table row" not a div. What elements, what
    properties, and how you change their style and with which browsers can
    be significant. It could have be a markup error elsewhere in the page
    that *you* where unaware of that can cause display anomalies. Your
    question was simply too vague to be of any use.

    >
    >> With respect to what markup? So I assume that your JavaScript (that you
    >> did not show) on a page (that you did not reference) is changing the CSS
    >> of some elements (that we cannot see) on this page (we also cannot see)
    >> is used to create a 'tabbed' interface?
    >>

    >
    > After the reception I recieved to my original post, why should I share
    > code with you? If someone had ASKED, perhaps. However, I was
    > immediately called stupid by multiple people. Perhaps next time, rather
    > than say "You are stupid you should show us code" people in this group
    > could say "Could you please share a representative bit of code so we
    > can diagnose the problem?"
    >


    They did! Travis wrote:

    "Wait!!!! There's the problem!! YOU are seeing the problem. WE are
    not because you didn't give us a URL...."

    That looks like a request to see your code to me. This may be your first
    full times here, but to the regulars who constantly get vague question
    from folk who will not show their code and yet *demand* we fix it for
    them...

    Well firstly this is not a help desk, this is Usenet for discussion.
    Secondly, you ain't paying us, so your attitude is not conducive to
    soliciting assistance from professional generous to offer a bit of their
    experience to others. You don't like, well lump it! We do not have to
    help you, go pay someone for help if you demand satisfaction.


    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 2, 2006
    #9
  10. wrote:
    > 1. There is no group that relates to a problem in the intersection of
    > HTML and Java - and that is exactly where this problem lay.


    Sure there is, this one does.

    > 2. After all the help on this forum (Sarcasm), I figured it out on my
    > own. I guess I wasn't so "Stupid" after all.

    We never said you were stupid (ok, maybe I did, but everyone else
    didn't). We at alt.html would rather move you to finding the answer
    yourself rather than us just give you the answer. This way you
    actually learn and grow as a web developer. As you can see, once again
    our plan worked.

    > 3. For anyone else who might see this problem in the future...


    See now you are even sharing your new found knowledge.
     
    Travis Newbury, Sep 5, 2006
    #10
  11. wrote:
    > Let's see...
    > After the reception I recieved to my original post, why should I share
    > code with you?


    Uh so we can see what the problem is?

    > If someone had ASKED...


    It is not our place to ask. You are the one looking for an answer to
    your problem. So provide us with information we need to help you.

    > immediately called stupid by multiple people.


    No, I said it was a stupid question, not that you were stupid. But with
    your replies, you are beginning to look pretty stupid. Maybe it was a
    self fulfilling prophecy?
     
    Travis Newbury, Sep 5, 2006
    #11
  12. Sym Guest

    wrote:
    > > Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    > > that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    > > of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    > > *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.


    But there is probably a large percentage of people on here viewing via
    google groups and as we are all lovely people we cater for them
    lovingly !

    btw top posting can be clear if used properly, it is not because he is
    top posting that it was unclear, he just got it wrong.



    Sym
    ;)
     
    Sym, Sep 5, 2006
    #12
  13. rf Guest

    Sym
    news:...
    >
    > But there is probably a large percentage of people on here viewing via
    > google groups and as we are all lovely people we cater for them
    > lovingly !


    Google groups is a bloody pain in the arse. Lets all sorts of pelicans in.
    >
    > btw top posting can be clear if used properly,


    Bullshit.

    --
    Richard.
     
    rf, Sep 5, 2006
    #13
  14. Sym wrote:
    > wrote:
    >>> Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    >>> that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    >>> of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    >>> *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.

    >
    > But there is probably a large percentage of people on here viewing via
    > google groups and as we are all lovely people we cater for them
    > lovingly !
    >


    Way to prove my point! WookieTim did not write the quote, I did! Damn GG
    can't even get it right when they *don't* top post!

    > btw top posting can be clear if used properly, it is not because he is
    > top posting that it was unclear, he just got it wrong.


    Only if only 2 people are posting and only referencing the immediate
    previous post! If not it becomes a mess as your feeble attempt to
    respond to my post!

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 5, 2006
    #14
  15. Sym Guest

    Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    > Sym wrote:
    > > wrote:
    > >>> Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    > >>> that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    > >>> of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    > >>> *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.

    > >
    > > But there is probably a large percentage of people on here viewing via
    > > google groups and as we are all lovely people we cater for them
    > > lovingly !
    > >

    >
    > Way to prove my point! WookieTim did not write the quote, I did! Damn GG
    > can't even get it right when they *don't* top post!
    >


    Strange my nntp reader (xnews) showed it as above !


    oh well....
     
    Sym, Sep 5, 2006
    #15
  16. Els Guest

    Sym wrote:
    > Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    >> Sym wrote:
    >>> wrote:


    [missing attribution to Jonathan]

    >>>>> Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    >>>>> that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    >>>>> of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    >>>>> *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.


    [Missing whatever it was WookieTim said]

    >>> But there is probably a large percentage of people on here viewing via
    >>> google groups and as we are all lovely people we cater for them
    >>> lovingly !

    >>
    >> Way to prove my point! WookieTim did not write the quote, I did! Damn GG
    >> can't even get it right when they *don't* top post!

    >
    > Strange my nntp reader (xnews) showed it as above !


    That's because WookieTim didn't attribute the quotation to Jonathan,
    and you didn't quote anything said by WookieTim.

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
     
    Els, Sep 5, 2006
    #16
  17. Els Guest

    Sym wrote:

    > Strange my nntp reader (xnews) showed it as above !


    Why do you read in X-News but post using Google Groups?

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
     
    Els, Sep 5, 2006
    #17
  18. Sym wrote:
    > Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    >> Sym wrote:
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>> Actually *who* are your responding to? It was 'numberwhun' who suggested
    >>>>> that another group would be better suited for your question, not Jukka
    >>>>> of which you directly replied to in the thread. But of course since you
    >>>>> *top posted* this is unclear. This is not Google Groups, it is usenet.
    >>> But there is probably a large percentage of people on here viewing via
    >>> google groups and as we are all lovely people we cater for them
    >>> lovingly !
    >>>

    >> Way to prove my point! WookieTim did not write the quote, I did! Damn GG
    >> can't even get it right when they *don't* top post!
    >>

    >
    > Strange my nntp reader (xnews) showed it as above !
    >


    Not what you are using currently, GG posted from Firefox.


    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 5, 2006
    #18
  19. Sym Guest


    > Not what you are using currently, GG posted from Firefox.




    yup - cos i dont have write access on my nntp subscription :(
     
    Sym, Sep 5, 2006
    #19
  20. Els Guest

    Sym wrote:

    >> Not what you are using currently, GG posted from Firefox.

    >
    > yup - cos i dont have write access on my nntp subscription :(


    You mean you actually pay to read only?
    Try this one: http://news.individual.net/

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
     
    Els, Sep 5, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

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

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Marek

    Can someone help me? (code here)

    Marek, Nov 4, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    460
    Kevin Spencer
    Nov 4, 2004
  2. Brandon McCombs
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    528
    Richard Wheeldon
    Aug 28, 2006
  3. Daniel Rudy
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    286
    Daniel Rudy
    Jan 23, 2007
  4. rincewind

    stupid, STUPID question!

    rincewind, Apr 19, 2009, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,046
  5. What-a-Tool
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    639
    What-a-Tool
    Jul 2, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page