Form not terminating on FireFox

R

Randy Webb

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 11/14/2005 5:14 AM:
RobG wrote:

Aaron said:
Your code contains a conglomerate of HTML and JavaScript error :-(

Ah <script> sections in <head>

var doc = self.frames['output'].document;
doc.open("text/html");
Click to expand...

the open() method does not take any arguments:
[...]
Click to expand...

<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-DOM-Level-2-HTML-20001113/html.html#ID-72161170>

The statement is correct, however the reference is outdated. You are
inappropriately and needlessly referring to a Working Draft (WD) where
a Recommendation (REC), and, as such, a Specification and Web Standard
has been published long ago.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant to this thread.
<http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-HTML/html.html#ID-72161170>

(See also <where I already
explained this.)
Click to expand...

Please give references that anybody has access to.
 
R

Robert

Thomas said:
RobG wrote:

<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-DOM-Level-2-HTML-20001113/html.html#ID-72161170>

... You are
inappropriately and needlessly referring to a Working Draft (WD) where
a Recommendation (REC), and, as such, a Specification and Web Standard
has been published long ago.

<http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-HTML/html.html#ID-72161170>

(See also <where I already
explained this.)
Click to expand...

Nothing happens when clicking on this link (using Thunderbird).
I followed the W3 links and automatically was directed to
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-DOM-Level-2-HTML-20030109/
which is
http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-HTML/
So I was curious what can be explained about it.
 
V

VK

Do not take <Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn> too close to your heart. He's
one of numerous people in this group who managed to learn the basics of
the Books of the Cannon, and really believed what an appropriate
quotation from the book may solve anyone's problem. It is not true, but
the full reveal of this truth may hurt endlessly - so we just skip on
it.
 
D

David Dorward

Irrelevant to this thread.
Click to expand...

This is Usenet. Discussions evolve, and drifting to tangential topics is
perfectly normal.
Please give references that anybody has access to.
Click to expand...

Everybody does have access to that resource. If it happens to have expired
on your newserver (or if your news client isn't good enough to look up a
post by its message id), then you can pop it into Google Groups and
retrieve it that way.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

VK said:
Do not take <Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn> too close to your heart. He's
one of numerous people in this group who managed to learn the basics of
the Books of the Cannon, and really believed what an appropriate
quotation from the book may solve anyone's problem. It is not true, but
the full reveal of this truth may hurt endlessly - so we just skip on
it.
Click to expand...

What are you babbling about? The very text of the reference used by
_Rob_ states that it is inappropriate to cite it as reference material:

| This is a W3C Working Draft for review by W3C members and other interested
| parties. It is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted
| by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use W3C Working
| Drafts as reference material or to cite them as other than "work in
| progress".

This does not invalidate _Rob's_ argument (which you obviously not
noticed), however, since as I stated there is a Specification for it
that says exactly the same.

If would would just have read what was posted and not what you imaged
you understood of it, you would be much less successful in posing as a
complete idiot here. I am sure there was already someone who told you
this.


PointedEars
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

David said:
This is Usenet. Discussions evolve, and drifting to tangential topics is
perfectly normal.
Click to expand...

And there was not even a drift in topic but a correction of the reference
provided and a confirmation of the argument based on it.


PointedEars
 
R

Robert

Thomas said:
VK wrote:




If would would just have read what was posted and not what you imaged
you understood of it,
Click to expand...

This sentence hurts my eyes.
you would be much less successful in posing as a
complete idiot here. I am sure there was already someone who told you
this.
Click to expand...

Hello!!!
Can we please be a little more friendly towards eachother? And I don't
mean just Thomas and VK. I don't know what's going on. We preach to
eachother about netiquette and proper quotation, but don't use some
basic politeness when communication to eachother. I am sure that I am
not the only one that feels that things have gotten a bit aggressive
here lately in too many threads. People don't come here to read personal
insults.

Back on-topic:
<
I found the thread now, but I don't see how it is relevant to W3C
specification.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

aundro said:
Robert said:
I am sure that I am not the only one that feels that things have
gotten a bit aggressive here lately in too many threads. [...]
Click to expand...

Absolutely
Click to expand...

Well, respect has to be earned. VK keeps on presenting his nonsense
as the truth, even though disproved in short and in length many times
by more than one regular of this group. Since he does not listen to
polite arguments, one has to find other ways to put him in his place.
In fact, the only reason why I have not killfiled him is that I am
afraid he is so experienced in posting nonsense looking serious, a
newbie, especially one little experienced in client-side scripting,
could actually fall for it.


PointedEars
 
V

VK

Robert said:
I am sure that I am not the only one that feels that things have
gotten a bit aggressive here lately in too many threads. [...]
Click to expand...

Absolutely
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

[1]
As you may notice even in this thread, the OP problem has been solved
by me (VK) in my first post. You also can see that <Thomas
'PointedEars' Lahn> as usual did not contribute anything into solving
the problem but trached the thread with pointless references and
neurastenic comments.

If you look in this group archives you'll see that his contribution is
stable very low, and his posting style is stable barely tolerable. Just
few month ago he used to be kicked off from all thread by The Cabal
members - until he had found a secure spot - of being a watch dog. So
now he sees his primary job by running across all threads and barking
on VK.

[2]
I personally state myself as a tolerant person (mostly). My posts may
be sometimes overly pathetic or wrong. You are totally free of errors
only if you don't do anything. But I always trying to find the truth -
even if it's going to be not my truth. Two arguments only I do not
accept and go ballistic:
"It's not true because N said it"
"It cannot be because the books/docs do not say that"
[3]
I visited <microsoft.public.scripting.jscript> and I have to admit that
in comparison of *styles* it looks like a Victorian evening party
against of a Wild West saturday night saloon. I doubt that clj will
ever get this level of refinement, but definitely there are some things
to improve to not scare hell out of newcomers. Personally I'll start to
shave now and hide the gun from my belt to the pocket.
:)
 
R

Robert

Thomas said:
aundro wrote:

Robert said:
I am sure that I am not the only one that feels that things have
gotten a bit aggressive here lately in too many threads. [...]
Click to expand...

Absolutely
Click to expand...


Well, respect has to be earned. VK keeps on presenting his nonsense
as the truth, even though disproved in short and in length many times
by more than one regular of this group.
Click to expand...

You don't have to earn not being insulted.
You can utterly disagree with someone without resorting to calling
someone a complete idiot. There are occasions that I thought that VK
made erroneous comments, or more often I simply could not understand
him, but insults don't help. Just warn the 'newbie' if you feel he is
being given wrong information. In the past I have given some wrong
information by accident or ignorance, and did not mind being corrected
if in a reasonably polite manner.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

VK said:
I am sure that I am not the only one that feels that things have
gotten a bit aggressive here lately in too many threads. [...]

Absolutely
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

[1]
[...] You also can see that <Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn> as usual
Click to expand...

As usual _to you_. Not everything you are unable to comprehend is nonsense.
did not contribute anything into solving the problem
Click to expand...

And I did not intend to as there was already a working solution. This is
not a support forum, but a newsgroup. I corrected a statement made by
RobG ...
but trached the thread with pointless references
Click to expand...

.... by commenting on the reference that was already given by RobG(!)
regarding that statement and provided the correct one which still
backed his argument. This I already explained to you in
<but you still not only
ignore it but try to turn that against me since it does not fit
your humble perception of the world.
[...]
If you look in this group archives you'll see that his contribution
is stable very low,
Click to expand...

Another of your lies I can live with. There are other people, even
one I scored down for forging headers, who will disagree with you.
and his posting style is stable barely tolerable. Just
few month ago he used to be kicked off from all thread by The Cabal
members - until he had found a secure spot - of being a watch dog.
Click to expand...

You write as you manage to understand. I wonder what "The Cabal" is
in your mind.
So now he sees his primary job by running across all threads and barking
on VK.
Click to expand...

No, my primary job here alas has had to change into correcting the utter
nonsense you continue to post as the Holy Truth, so that others cannot
possibly fall for it.
[2]
I personally state myself as a tolerant person (mostly). My posts may
be sometimes overly pathetic or wrong. You are totally free of errors
only if you don't do anything.
Click to expand...

I don't despise people who are wrong. Nobody's perfect. I despise people
like you who refuse to accept that they have been proven wrong, who wind
around and continue to claim they are right. I despise people who ignore
the Truth of Reality, who seek to twist it to fit their, and only their,
needs.


PointedEars
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

VK said:
Thomas said:
I wonder what "The Cabal" is in your mind.
Click to expand...

It's a shameful question for a person who's claiming himself
to be a newsgroup rules and netiquette specialist. [...]
Click to expand...

It is not. I asked about your definition. One that may you think
in some way fits

| Just few month ago he used to be kicked off from all thread by
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| The Cabal members

in said:
<http://www.linux.it/~md/usenet/gr3.htm>
Click to expand...

So you have not understood that either.


PointedEars
 
A

Aaron Gray

Well I got the damb thing working now, well the other day.

With all the bad vibes I wish I had solved the thing myself in the first
place. Well whether I would have been able to is another thing, I never came
across document.open/close before and do not know how I would have been able
to find it without knowing it existed in the first place, so to speak.

Anyway thank you all for helping me out with this one I have had this bug
hanging round for quite a while now I even think it used to be in IE as well
!

Here's to proper integerity.

Thanks again all input is welcome :)


Aaron
 
L

Lasse Reichstein Nielsen

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said:
Well, respect has to be earned.
Click to expand...

But civil behavior should not.

It doesn't matter if one thinks that the other person is an idiot, no
matter how obvious it sometimes seems, bashing the person will not
change that. No matter if I'm right in everything I say, attacking
another poster will not bring anything but, perhaps, brief personal
gratification, and it *will* be one more voice lowering the level and
tone of the group, setting a bad example for everybody else.

The tone in this group *is* worsening, and have been for a while.
Even traditionally reasonable posters have begun going for the
person, not the error of his argument.


Or, more bluntly: I don't *really* care if someone thinks someone else
is an idiot, but if the someone need to wave it in front of me, I
*will* think he is acting like one. You can all do better than that!


So, I dare everybody to go a week without attacking another poster :)

/L 'Never argue with idiots. They merely bring you down to their level,
then beat you with experience'
 

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

Similar Threads

Script working in Firefox but not Chrome and Safari 3
Clear Error Message Upon New Input on Form? 1
Bold not working 4
Script works fine on test server but not on production server 3
Chrome not displaying uploaded HTML and CSS code 5
HCaptcha - How to stop page from refreshing on submit if captcha is not checked/validated 1
Firefox inappropriately blocks (as a "popup") a form submission usingjavascript on a web page I'm de 13
A simple javascript code not working on Firefox 3

Members online

Total: 29 (members: 1, guests: 28)
Robots: 161

Forum statistics

Threads
473,774
Messages
2,569,599
Members
45,163
Latest member
Sasha15427

Latest Threads

Top