Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #17308 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhilov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-11-19 13:00 -0800 |
| Last post | 2012-12-23 19:13 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 226 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript
Maintainer of the FAQ Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhilov@gmail.com> - 2012-11-19 13:00 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-11-19 13:34 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2012-11-20 01:25 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-11-20 13:39 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhilov@gmail.com> - 2012-11-20 11:24 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1247@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-11-21 19:19 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-11-22 14:09 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1247@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-11-20 19:50 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-11-20 19:56 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-11-21 11:24 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1247@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-11-22 23:34 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-11-23 11:07 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1247@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-11-24 18:30 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ jim.ley@gmail.com - 2012-11-22 03:06 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhilov@gmail.com> - 2012-11-22 07:15 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Martin Leese <please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID> - 2012-11-22 08:48 -0700
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1247@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-11-23 20:00 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-11-24 10:36 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1247@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-11-25 19:16 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-11-26 10:18 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-11-26 12:50 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-11-30 14:23 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-01 09:24 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-12-01 08:45 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-12-01 16:17 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-12 19:30 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-01 18:50 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-02 19:25 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-02 21:31 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhilov@gmail.com> - 2012-12-05 03:48 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-05 12:55 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-12-05 14:52 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-12-06 06:16 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-12-05 16:56 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-12-06 00:20 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-05 14:47 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-06 07:11 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 08:37 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-06 17:50 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 08:57 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-06 18:32 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 10:34 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-07 11:05 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-07 07:21 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-11 09:01 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-12 19:37 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-12-07 11:24 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-11 09:00 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-07 20:54 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2012-12-08 03:42 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Good Guy <hello.world@example.com> - 2012-12-08 02:53 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-09 16:43 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-07 11:16 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-08 18:45 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-06 10:40 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-06 15:16 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 08:48 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-12-06 18:31 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-06 23:06 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 16:24 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-08 18:06 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 01:29 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-12-05 22:24 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-05 23:36 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 00:35 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-12-07 10:45 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 16:01 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-07 21:00 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-12-08 10:17 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 01:12 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 23:22 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-08 04:46 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-08 15:56 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-08 09:00 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Good Guy <hello.world@example.com> - 2012-12-08 17:54 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-08 20:53 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 11:02 +0100
Functions in JavaScript vs. mathematics & the name "JavaScript" "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-12-08 23:31 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Mike Duffy <Use_guestbook_page@website.in.sig> - 2012-12-09 02:02 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-08 23:12 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-09 16:44 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2012-12-10 01:30 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-08 16:04 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-08 08:37 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-08 21:34 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-08 21:49 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-09 11:05 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2012-12-06 03:24 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-06 16:09 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-06 15:23 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-06 17:44 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-07 15:03 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 09:05 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2012-12-06 18:59 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2012-12-06 19:24 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-06 19:26 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 14:11 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-07 03:07 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 18:36 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-07 04:11 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-06 20:26 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-12-07 20:40 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-07 01:58 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-07 14:32 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-07 07:22 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 11:19 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-07 21:11 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-07 16:19 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-08 18:33 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-08 22:14 -0800
FAQ source format (was: Maintainer of the FAQ) Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 13:56 +0100
Re: FAQ source format Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-09 08:09 -0800
Re: FAQ source format Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 19:12 -0800
Re: FAQ source format Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-10 20:49 +0000
Re: FAQ source format (was: Maintainer of the FAQ) Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 18:59 -0800
Re: FAQ source format Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-09 20:13 -0800
Re: FAQ source format Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 20:50 -0800
Re: FAQ source format (was: Maintainer of the FAQ) Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-10 20:41 +0000
Re: FAQ source format (was: Maintainer of the FAQ) Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-10 18:09 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-09 07:06 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 19:12 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-09 20:11 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-10 20:32 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-10 17:53 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-12 21:07 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2012-12-12 21:52 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-13 16:05 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-15 00:40 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-13 08:09 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-15 00:40 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-15 11:02 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-16 17:58 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-17 11:22 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-17 10:40 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-17 20:05 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-18 00:31 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Osmo Saarikumpu <osmo@weppipakki.com> - 2012-12-18 10:18 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-18 13:38 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-18 14:59 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-18 16:33 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-18 09:26 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-18 23:09 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-18 23:47 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-18 15:21 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-18 16:32 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-18 08:11 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-19 18:26 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-20 06:55 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-21 15:46 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-21 06:59 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-21 08:27 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-21 19:12 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-21 15:30 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-21 08:24 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-21 19:09 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-21 20:21 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-22 08:58 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-14 08:01 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Adam Silver <adambsilver@gmail.com> - 2012-12-14 00:28 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-15 23:25 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-15 00:39 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-16 00:23 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-15 15:00 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Osmo Saarikumpu <osmo@weppipakki.com> - 2012-12-16 17:14 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-16 17:32 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-16 17:24 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-18 17:15 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-19 18:57 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Osmo Saarikumpu <osmo@weppipakki.com> - 2012-12-27 23:03 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-28 11:14 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-28 09:12 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-08 18:24 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-12-07 10:11 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-13 09:25 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-12-14 07:26 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2012-12-13 21:45 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-07 21:06 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-08 02:45 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-12-08 13:30 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-09 17:00 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-12-08 10:14 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-05 09:03 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-05 18:39 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-05 11:56 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-05 12:30 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-12-06 08:54 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-05 23:38 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-12-13 14:18 -0500
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1250@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-15 00:09 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-16 01:54 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-17 18:32 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-18 07:06 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-18 17:54 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-18 11:38 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-18 12:50 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-18 23:23 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-18 19:46 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-19 18:10 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-19 11:31 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-19 22:54 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-12-19 16:36 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-12-05 22:49 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-06 23:21 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-06 15:08 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 01:01 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Adam Silver <adambsilver@gmail.com> - 2012-12-06 07:40 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-06 23:51 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Good Guy <hello.world@example.com> - 2012-12-08 02:19 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2012-12-08 03:57 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Good Guy <hello.world@example.com> - 2012-12-08 03:06 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2012-12-08 09:34 +0100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Good Guy <hello.world@example.com> - 2012-12-08 13:36 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-22 16:19 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-22 08:59 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-23 13:38 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-12-23 10:49 +0200
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-23 16:58 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1252@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-24 21:03 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 09:33 -0800
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1252@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-28 21:33 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-28 11:16 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-28 09:08 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-12-28 22:01 +1100
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-12-28 11:26 +0000
Re: Maintainer of the FAQ Dr J R Stockton <reply1251@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-12-23 19:13 +0000
Page 2 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 12 Next page →
| From | "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-11-26 12:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <k8vhhu$oen$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #17351 |
2012-11-26 12:18, John G Harris wrote: > And we mustn't forget that an important use of the FAQ is so we can say > 'Read the FAQ!' to inexperienced people who've done something > inadvisable. We don't want those people to crawl round a maze of web > pages, let alone use the search feature of a wiki : they won't know what > they're looking for. Sadly, FAQs were never as popular as they should have been. These days, I'm afraid there are fewer people that read the c.l.j. FAQ, or would read it even if it were more up-to-date, than people who discuss the FAQ maintainer issue. This discussion is useless and will remain useless until someone pops up and volunteers. Naturally, that someone should be a person who can be expected to maintain the FAQ for the benefit of its potential users, rather than write long lectures about his theories and irrelevant details. There will hardly be many new frequently asked questions in this group. So the maintenance should mostly consist of updating references and adding relevant new information to existing answers. And even that work could mainly mean just implementing other people's suggestions, after checking their correctness. You don't need to be a genius to do such things. It probably makes it more difficult if you are, or think you are. You won't get any reward, except very casual thanks, and you will be flamed, and you are supposed to stand it in silence. So, any volunteers? -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-11-30 14:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.DEB.2.02.1211301423050.2505@ubuntu.ubuntu-domain> |
| In reply to | #17334 |
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, jim.ley@gmail.com wrote: > The problem has always been finding a maintainer with the time... Thomas has my explicit support. His extensive technical depth is befitting of the role of FAQ maintainer. I am also available to assist him if need be. > I would caution that a WIKI will require more regular maintaining > to prevent spam if it's at all open, but at least can remain > current. In my experience with Wikipedia, its esoteric editing syntax and odd commenting system have been counterproductive. I think that an HTML FAQ buttressed by complementary discussion on Usenet is optimal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-01 09:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oKUT3KCYzcuQFwvm@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD> |
| In reply to | #17386 |
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 at 14:23:17, in comp.lang.javascript, Matt McDonald wrote: >On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, jim.ley@gmail.com wrote: > >> The problem has always been finding a maintainer with the time... > >Thomas has my explicit support. His extensive technical depth is >befitting of the role of FAQ maintainer. I am also available to >assist him if need be. <snip> Do you trust him to do what the majority have agreed? Even if he disagrees? I don't. John -- John Harris
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-01 08:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.DEB.2.02.1212010843420.2570@ubuntu.ubuntu-domain> |
| In reply to | #17392 |
On Sat, 1 Dec 2012, John G Harris wrote: > Do you trust him to do what the majority have agreed? Even if he > disagrees? I don't. For the greater good of the newsgroup? Yes, I do. I would defer to the group consensus as well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-01 16:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <k9d3i6$6it$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #17386 |
2012-11-30 21:23, Matt McDonald wrote: > On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, jim.ley@gmail.com wrote: > >> The problem has always been finding a maintainer with the time... > > Thomas has my explicit support. His extensive technical depth is > befitting of the role of FAQ maintainer. You can't be serious. An ability to write long lectures on off-topic matters does not mean extensive technical depth, especially when their content is often wrong. And a FAQ maintainer does not need extensive technical depth. The essential qualifications are quite different. Most definitely he should not think that he has extensive and superior technical depth. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-12 19:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <rqiic810qrrrt7r5corvs9advtpk3liafj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #17394 |
On Sat, 01 Dec 2012 16:17:46 +0200, "Jukka K. Korpela"
<jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote:
>2012-11-30 21:23, Matt McDonald wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, jim.ley@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> The problem has always been finding a maintainer with the time...
>>
>> Thomas has my explicit support. His extensive technical depth is
>> befitting of the role of FAQ maintainer.
>
>You can't be serious. An ability to write long lectures on off-topic
>matters does not mean extensive technical depth, especially when their
>content is often wrong.
Seconded.
>And a FAQ maintainer does not need extensive technical depth. The
>essential qualifications are quite different. Most definitely he should
>not think that he has extensive and superior technical depth.
If I had the time, I would qualify nicely. I know so much more
about JavaScript than when I started, but I *still* hit things from
time to time that make me feel ignorant.
I want to see someone with that sense of knowing but not of
everything as FAQ maintainer.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-01 18:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <7112671.6N6nmtZEex@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #17386 |
Matt McDonald wrote: > On Thu, 22 Nov 2012, jim.ley@gmail.com wrote: >> The problem has always been finding a maintainer with the time... > > Thomas has my explicit support. His extensive technical depth is > befitting of the role of FAQ maintainer. I am also available to > assist him if need be. Thank you very much. I would like to point out, however, that a technical background should be only one requirement. AISB, a FAQ is not supposed to be a tutorial (it can refer to good tutorials, though), and the answers it provides are not supposed to replace Usenet articles (it can refer to good Usenet articles, though). So its style needs to be different from that of those two. You need to be explain the technical issues in a concise, consistent, and factually correct way, so that a person willing to learn can understand it and use it as basis for their self-education. Given my experience in successfully teaching computer technology, including software development, to many different kinds of people IRL and on the Net for many years, I can do that. Any help provided to that end would be appreciated. >> I would caution that a WIKI will require more regular maintaining >> to prevent spam if it's at all open, but at least can remain >> current. > > In my experience with Wikipedia, its esoteric editing syntax and odd > commenting system have been counterproductive. I think that an HTML > FAQ buttressed by complementary discussion on Usenet is optimal. I am not opposed to using MediaWiki; I have been a Wikipedia contributor for many years and I am familiar with what I think is a rather intuitive syntax. However, the current FAQ is apparently XML-based. XSLT stylesheets can provide the same content in different forms that are suitable for the Web and plain-text media like Usenet, given consistent markup. So I think that the issues with the (posted) plain-text version of the FAQ can be solved as well. Regards, PointedEars -- Danny Goodman's books are out of date and teach practices that are positively harmful for cross-browser scripting. -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <cife6q$253$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> (2004)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-02 19:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k9g6ds$b2c$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #17308 |
W dniu 2012-11-19 22:00, Asen Bozhilov pisze: [...] > Give proposals for the new maintainer, also wiki pages is good > variant. Personally I think that Wiki pages are mostly acceptable. Easy to use and management. The discussion here, *for me*, is overcomplicated. Case is simple: install any wiki system and let's work on content. The only one thing is to create some simple rules: * Criticise the code, not the author * Do not post examples that wasn't verified * Avoid to include links that doesn't work * No place for ego's * Do not be aggressive, sarcastic and cynical -- Cezary Tomczyk http://www.ctomczyk.pl/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-02 21:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k9gdri$ucb$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #17414 |
W dniu 2012-12-02 19:25, Cezary Tomczyk pisze: > W dniu 2012-11-19 22:00, Asen Bozhilov pisze: > [...] >> Give proposals for the new maintainer, also wiki pages is good >> variant. > > Personally I think that Wiki pages are mostly acceptable. Easy to use > and management. The discussion here, *for me*, is overcomplicated. Case > is simple: install any wiki system and let's work on content. > > The only one thing is to create some simple rules: > > * Criticise the code, not the author > * Do not post examples that wasn't verified > * Avoid to include links that doesn't work > * No place for ego's > * Do not be aggressive, sarcastic and cynical One more: * If you criticize, then provide another (better?) option and explain where presented solution fail. -- Cezary Tomczyk http://www.ctomczyk.pl/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhilov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-05 03:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1868da91-d142-49ee-8b09-27c0983c1af4@a2g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #17308 |
We have discussed the same topic and in twitter. Most of the people agree with that Thomas Lahn to be the new maintainer of the FAQ. The ex maintainer Garrett Smith also agrees with that choice. I wrote an email to Jim Ley pointing that discussion and I think we should try with that choice. Thomas wants to maintain the FAQ and I believe he would improve the FAQ with more entries and fixing the currents. I propose instead of discussing who can or cannot be the new maintainer to give a chance of Thomas Lahn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-05 12:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA1208388C696Beejj99@194.109.133.133> |
| In reply to | #17475 |
Asen Bozhilov wrote on 05 dec 2012 in comp.lang.javascript: > We have discussed the same topic and in twitter. > Most of the people agree with that Thomas Lahn to be the new > maintainer of the FAQ. The ex maintainer Garrett Smith also agrees > with that choice. > I wrote an email to Jim Ley pointing that discussion and I think we > should try with that choice. > Thomas wants to maintain the FAQ and I believe he would improve the > FAQ with more entries and fixing the currents. I propose instead of > discussing who can or cannot be the new maintainer to give a chance of > Thomas Lahn. Agree. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-05 14:52 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <k9ng2f$mbb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #17475 |
2012-12-05 13:48, Asen Bozhilov wrote: > We have discussed the same topic and in twitter. Discussions about the maintainer of the FAQ of a newsgroup belong to the group. This includes answering any counterarguments. > Most of the people agree with that Thomas Lahn to be the new > maintainer of the FAQ. Who counted the people? > Thomas wants to maintain the FAQ and I believe he would improve the > FAQ with more entries and fixing the currents. "More entries"? What are the frequently asked questions in this group that are not answered in the FAQ? Usenet is really dying. Comp.lang.javascript might still have a chance of surviving for some years, but making an aggressive, off-topic lecturing "There is no 'javascript'" nitpicker the FAQ maintainer would greatly reduce the chances. There are surely better forums for technical discussions about JacaScript nowadays. The best that this group could do is to act as a fairly friendly and open forum that welcomes newcomers. From this standpoint, I can hardly imagine a worse choice for the FAQ maintainer. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-06 06:16 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <raadnaBsW6c-ACLNnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au> |
| In reply to | #17484 |
On 5/12/2012 11:52 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > 2012-12-05 13:48, Asen Bozhilov wrote: > >> We have discussed the same topic and in twitter. > > Discussions about the maintainer of the FAQ of a newsgroup belong to the > group. This includes answering any counterarguments. And after months in-group argument/counterargument there is what result? >> Most of the people agree with that Thomas Lahn to be the new >> maintainer of the FAQ. > > Who counted the people? Why does it matter if you were not part of that particular discussion? >> Thomas wants to maintain the FAQ and I believe he would improve the >> FAQ with more entries and fixing the currents. > > "More entries"? What are the frequently asked questions in this group > that are not answered in the FAQ? > > Usenet is really dying. Comp.lang.javascript might still have a chance > of surviving for some years, but making an aggressive, off-topic > lecturing "There is no 'javascript'" nitpicker the FAQ maintainer would > greatly reduce the chances. What evidence do you base your conclusion on? > There are surely better forums for technical discussions about > JacaScript nowadays. The best that this group could do is to act as a > fairly friendly and open forum that welcomes newcomers. From this > standpoint, I can hardly imagine a worse choice for the FAQ maintainer. To me its funny that you would rather try to "hurt" PE than to allow the FAQ be properly maintained. Andrew Poulos
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-05 16:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.DEB.2.02.1212051605560.2617@ubuntu.ubuntu-domain> |
| In reply to | #17484 |
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Discussions about the maintainer of the FAQ of a newsgroup belong
> to the group. This includes answering any counterarguments.
I agree that formal discussions should take place here. The
discussion that took place was meant to informally discuss support.
Asen and Garrett Smith were discussing the need for a maintainer. I
mentioned my endorsement of Thomas and, a consensus was reached
between the following people:
1. Asen Bozhilov,
2. Garrett Smith,
3. Cezary Tomczyk, and
4. myself.
That list, of course, does not represent any sort of decisive
consensus for the group. Such a consensus would be reached here.
> Who counted the people?
I have listed them above. Asen and I have both posted our
endorsements here and, I will request that endorsements be posted
from the rest of the above list.
> "More entries"? What are the frequently asked questions in this
> group that are not answered in the FAQ?
As ECMAScript continues to evolve, questions will surely arise about
new features. New host APIs have emerged, uncovered by the FAQ.
> Usenet is really dying. Comp.lang.javascript might still have a
> chance of surviving for some years, but making an aggressive,
> off-topic lecturing "There is no 'javascript'" nitpicker the FAQ
> maintainer would greatly reduce the chances.
I sense some hyperbole here. Though you and Thomas have rattled
sabres in this group often, no other candidate has the same level of
support--if any--coupled with a desire to undertake the given task.
If there are, please list them for consideration.
> There are surely better forums for technical discussions about
> [JavaScript] nowadays. The best that this group could do is to act
> as a fairly friendly and open forum that welcomes newcomers. From
> this standpoint, I can hardly imagine a worse choice for the FAQ
> maintainer.
I agree that the group can be more conciliatory. However, in my
experience, many "newcomers" who have left the group have
misinterpreted the "tone" of notable members. Pedantry *is*
necessary for technical depth. Few, if any, communities exist on the
Internet that can discuss JavaScript and client-side development at
the level of technical depth that this group can. I have participated
in various fora discussing JavaScript over the past three years and,
none have shared the expertise of this group. StackOverflow, Reddit,
and ##javascript (Freenode IRC) have all failed.
Though I think that group veterans who already know of the
"javascript" distinction should not be lectured, I think that
novices definitely need to be aware that JavaScript is an ECMAScript
implementation. That is a fundamental point. Thomas is definitely
right to emphasise it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-06 00:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <k9ohc9$jlr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #17505 |
2012-12-05 23:56, Matt McDonald wrote: > I think that > novices definitely need to be aware that JavaScript is an ECMAScript > implementation. That is a fundamental point. Thomas is definitely > right to emphasise it. This is just the kind of false evangelism that the FAQ (and the group) does not need. JavaScript was published in 1995, years before anyone considered defining an ECMA standard for a language like that. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-05 14:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <LPidnVTnrISXUiLNnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #17506 |
On 12/5/2012 2:20 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > 2012-12-05 23:56, Matt McDonald wrote: > >> I think that >> novices definitely need to be aware that JavaScript is an ECMAScript >> implementation. That is a fundamental point. Thomas is definitely >> right to emphasise it. > > This is just the kind of false evangelism that the FAQ (and the group) > does not need. JavaScript was published in 1995, years before anyone > considered defining an ECMA standard for a language like that. > So far, I have found no practical use for the information that the standard name is ECMAScript. It has not been relevant to any decision I've needed to make. I expect sooner or later I'll find it useful, but it was not high on the list of things I really needed to know to get started programming in JavaScript. Being told it did me no harm, but I've been using Usenet far too long to be put off by pedantry. It might chase away someone new trying out Usenet. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-06 07:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2ae76e56-b811-4601-be70-3acfe1bfea19@m4g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #17510 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote: > So far, I have found no practical use for the information that the > standard name is ECMAScript. It has not been relevant to any decision > I've needed to make. I expect sooner or later I'll find it useful, but > it was not high on the list of things I really needed to know to get > started programming in JavaScript. I am not one of those who has been stressing that point; quite the opposite, I would say. But I hope that is not what you heard from those making the point. It's not really a matter of the name. The main point being made is that there is no single language here, but a group of languages that to a greater or lesser degree adhere to the standard published by Ecma International. For a great deal of our discussion the differences between these related languages makes no practical difference. But there are times when the differences can become critical. I personally have no issue signaling those specific cases where the implementation makes a difference and only then being very precise about which versions of Microsoft's JScript, Mozilla's JavaScript, or whichever ECMAScript implementation are under discussion, choosing at other times to revert to the common usage of "Javascript". But I doubt even the most zealous advocates of the "There is no Javascript" position are particularly worried about the name "ECMAScript". -- Scott
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-06 08:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <IOKdnXkfTMFFVF3NnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #17515 |
On 12/6/2012 7:11 AM, Scott Sauyet wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: > >> So far, I have found no practical use for the information that the >> standard name is ECMAScript. It has not been relevant to any decision >> I've needed to make. I expect sooner or later I'll find it useful, but >> it was not high on the list of things I really needed to know to get >> started programming in JavaScript. > > I am not one of those who has been stressing that point; quite the > opposite, I would say. But I hope that is not what you heard from > those making the point. It's not really a matter of the name. The > main point being made is that there is no single language here, but a > group of languages that to a greater or lesser degree adhere to the > standard published by Ecma International. For a great deal of our > discussion the differences between these related languages makes no > practical difference. But there are times when the differences can > become critical. > > I personally have no issue signaling those specific cases where the > implementation makes a difference and only then being very precise > about which versions of Microsoft's JScript, Mozilla's JavaScript, or > whichever ECMAScript implementation are under discussion, choosing at > other times to revert to the common usage of "Javascript". But I > doubt even the most zealous advocates of the "There is no Javascript" > position are particularly worried about the name "ECMAScript". The problem with this position is that there are major dialect differences between e.g. what IE 8 supports and what IE 9 supports, with no change of language name. For that reason, it never occurred to me that insistence on not calling Javascript "Javascript" had anything at all to do with the critical issue of dialect differences. I was well aware of dialect differences before I came to this newsgroup, just from reading a book that consistently calls the language "JavaScript", but that includes the information I need when deciding whether to use a feature - which versions of which browsers support it, and any incompatibilities and variations between them. From a dialect point of view, saying "There is no Javascript" makes as much, and as little, sense to me as saying "There is no Fortran". The Javascript dialects have as much in common as e.g. VMS Fortran and Fortran 90. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-06 17:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <7907134.SqZQeKoA52@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #17520 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 12/6/2012 7:11 AM, Scott Sauyet wrote:
>> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>> So far, I have found no practical use for the information that the
>>> standard name is ECMAScript. It has not been relevant to any decision
>>> I've needed to make. I expect sooner or later I'll find it useful, but
>>> it was not high on the list of things I really needed to know to get
>>> started programming in JavaScript.
>>
>> I am not one of those who has been stressing that point; quite the
>> opposite, I would say. But I hope that is not what you heard from
>> those making the point. It's not really a matter of the name. The
>> main point being made is that there is no single language here, but a
>> group of languages that to a greater or lesser degree adhere to the
>> standard published by Ecma International. For a great deal of our
>> discussion the differences between these related languages makes no
>> practical difference. But there are times when the differences can
>> become critical.
>>
>> I personally have no issue signaling those specific cases where the
>> implementation makes a difference and only then being very precise
>> about which versions of Microsoft's JScript, Mozilla's JavaScript, or
>> whichever ECMAScript implementation are under discussion, choosing at
>> other times to revert to the common usage of "Javascript". But I
>> doubt even the most zealous advocates of the "There is no Javascript"
>> position are particularly worried about the name "ECMAScript".
>
> The problem with this position is that there are major dialect
> differences between e.g. what IE 8 supports and what IE 9 supports with
> no change of language name.
There are no “dialect differences”. Internet Explorer 8 supports a
different *version* of Microsoft *JScript* than IE 9. Even Microsoft
acknowledges that.
> For that reason, it never occurred to me that insistence on not calling
> Javascript "Javascript" had anything at all to do with the critical issue
> of dialect differences.
There are no dialect differences. There are different implementations of
the same standard, which have a different name each, and then different
versions of each of those implementations.
> I was well aware of dialect differences […]
You have a major misconception there.
PointedEars
--
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
&& navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
) // Plone, register_function.js:16
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-06 08:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <Na2dndPcPuDhU13NnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #17523 |
On 12/6/2012 8:50 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: ... > There are no dialect differences. There are different implementations of > the same standard, which have a different name each, and then different > versions of each of those implementations. > >> I was well aware of dialect differences […] > > You have a major misconception there. I have a set of lectures about linguistics on DVD. This argument is exactly the same as the one that happens for natural languages. Some dialects of Arabic are more different from each other than the Scandinavian languages that are considered distinct languages. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript
csiph-web