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

[WookieTim]

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]

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

 

[Travis Newbury]

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)

why of course, pretty standard...

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

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

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.

 

[dorayme]

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...

 

[WookieTim]

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.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

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.

 

[WookieTim]

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?"

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

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 ;-)

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.

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.

 

[Travis Newbury]

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]

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?

 

[Sym]

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

 

[rf]

Sym

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.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

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!

 

[Sym]

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....

 

[Els]

[missing attribution to Jonathan]

[Missing whatever it was WookieTim said]

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]

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

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

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

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

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

 

[Sym]

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

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

 

[Els]

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/