Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed9.news.xs4all.nl!nzpost2.xs4all.net!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: Alternative and fast option to some very useful jQuery features? From: "Evertjan." References: <87h92srvjd.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <6e364c21-1307-449c-afe1-6c5de62763c6@googlegroups.com> <08927503-fc48-4ab2-835f-21a1d0904e9b@googlegroups.com> <87h92psfkr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <07e760a7-1b58-45ab-ab46-7850e104a425@googlegroups.com> <75fb3301-67c0-4c7a-ae12-4af3220526d8@googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:15:21 +0100 Message-ID: User-Agent: Xnews/2009.05.01 Lines: 63 NNTP-Posting-Host: 109.72.40.136 X-Trace: 1490343317 dreader37.news.xs4all.nl 2066 ehannivo/109.72.40.136:64940 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:32843 justaguy wrote on 23 Mar 2017 in comp.lang.javascript: >> >> Try this in FF and on Edge and you know what illogical realy means. >> >> >> > >> > "In Chrome this gives a nice, though not logical and undocumented >> > effect." What exactly do you mean by that? >> >> Did you try it out on the browsers named? > Yes, Chrome (ver 56), Firefox (ver 52) and IE 11 > Weird tho, for just 11 lines of straight HTML code albeit HTML5, > rendering seems pains-taking for each browser compared to jQuery > autocomplete. Which translates to poor use experience, let alone logic. > > Does it mean that HTML5 "List" attribute is "buried" deep in a deep DOM > layer? You are mixing html5 'specification' and 'implementation'. Perhaps the 'specification' is not clear to a specific 'implementation'-team. The 'implementation' on different browsers differs in any case. >> > Do you expect HTML5 "List" attribute to behave exactly like jQuery UI >> > autocomplete? >> >> I do not expect anything to behave like jquery, as I think using >> jquery, which certainly is NOT an UI, is a mistake by itself, like >> using a boeing 707 to visit your next door neighbour, even disregarding >> the possible lack of innercity parking space. >> > Supposed you have the same need, Nonsense, what you declare to be your 'need' is just your 'desire'. > how do you solve this problem then? I 'would' not expect 'html5' to be a crossbrowser-ready application, there are many more vague ideas/wishes for the human/DOM-interface, that cannot be used yet or ever. > I take it you won't use jQuery autocomplete for this nor HTML5. I would build my own, learning from, and enjoying, the exercise, not having to worry about an instrument that is far mor convoluted than a simple html5 bugginess, where I do not understand the inner complexity, while there are better options. I would perhaps use a dirty solution on a page thet is only for my primary browser and only for own use and I can live with the crossbrowser incompatibility then. In the end autocomplete is just a gimmick, both making life seemingly easier and introducing wrong/unintended choices by the unwary user. But jQuery is bad for your mind as a programmer. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)