Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #24586 > unrolled thread

window.open allowing image to scale

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  window.open allowing image to scale Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2014-06-03 13:11 +1000
    Re: window.open allowing image to scale Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2014-06-03 13:19 +1000
      Re: window.open allowing image to scale "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-06-03 08:55 +0200
        Re: window.open allowing image to scale Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2014-06-03 18:38 +1000
          Re: window.open allowing image to scale "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-06-03 10:58 +0200
        Re: window.open allowing image to scale Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-04 11:28 +0200
          Re: window.open allowing image to scale "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-06-04 15:01 +0200
            Re: window.open allowing image to scale Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-04 15:16 +0200
              Re: window.open allowing image to scale "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-06-04 16:51 +0200
          Re: window.open allowing image to scale John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-06-04 14:47 +0100
            Re: window.open allowing image to scale Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-06-04 17:35 +0200
              Re: window.open allowing image to scale Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-04 18:18 +0200
                Re: window.open allowing image to scale John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-06-05 11:12 +0100
              Re: window.open allowing image to scale John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-06-05 11:03 +0100
                Re: window.open allowing image to scale Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-06-05 17:43 +0200
                  Re: window.open allowing image to scale John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-06-06 11:09 +0100
                Re: window.open allowing image to scale Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-06-08 19:41 +0100

#24586 — window.open allowing image to scale

I need to be able to popup a window to enable users to see the image 
they've selected. The simplest way I thought of using was to point 
window.open to the image itself.

This works but the image will rescale (at least it does in IE 9) if the 
popup window is resized to smaller than the image's "natural" size:

var myPop = window.open(
   "images/puzzle.jpg",
   "",
   "width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0"
);


Is there a way to keep the image from scaling?

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#24587

On 3/06/2014 1:11 PM, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> I need to be able to popup a window to enable users to see the image
> they've selected. The simplest way I thought of using was to point
> window.open to the image itself.
>
> This works but the image will rescale (at least it does in IE 9) if the
> popup window is resized to smaller than the image's "natural" size:
>
> var myPop = window.open(
>    "images/puzzle.jpg",
>    "",
>    "width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0"
> );
>
>
> Is there a way to keep the image from scaling?

To answer my own question, I just did this

var myPop = window.open("","","width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0);
myPop.document.open();
myPop.document.write("<img src='images/puzzle.jpg' alt=''>");
myPop.document.close();

and the image now doesn't scale when the window is made smaller than the 
image.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24588

Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote on 03 jun 2014 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

> On 3/06/2014 1:11 PM, Andrew Poulos wrote:
>> I need to be able to popup a window to enable users to see the image
>> they've selected. The simplest way I thought of using was to point
>> window.open to the image itself.
>>
>> This works but the image will rescale (at least it does in IE 9) if the
>> popup window is resized to smaller than the image's "natural" size:
>>
>> var myPop = window.open(
>>    "images/puzzle.jpg",
>>    "",
>>    "width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0"

It should be: resizable=1

>> );
>>
>>
>> Is there a way to keep the image from scaling?
> 
> To answer my own question, I just did this
> 
> var myPop = window.open("","","width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0);
> myPop.document.open();

this .document.open() is not needed, it is implicit.

> myPop.document.write("<img src='images/puzzle.jpg' alt=''>");
> myPop.document.close();

this .document.close() is not needed,
unless you want a second .document.write() 
to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()

> and the image now doesn't scale when the window is made smaller than the 
> image.

Okay.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24589

On 3/06/2014 4:55 PM, Evertjan. wrote:
> Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote on 03 jun 2014 in
> comp.lang.javascript:
>
>> On 3/06/2014 1:11 PM, Andrew Poulos wrote:
>>> I need to be able to popup a window to enable users to see the
>>> image they've selected. The simplest way I thought of using was
>>> to point window.open to the image itself.
>>>
>>> This works but the image will rescale (at least it does in IE 9)
>>> if the popup window is resized to smaller than the image's
>>> "natural" size:
>>>
>>> var myPop = window.open( "images/puzzle.jpg", "",
>>> "width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0"
>
> It should be: resizable=1

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Window.open>
says that

"NOTE: All features can be set to yes, 1 or just be present to
be 'on', set to no or 0 or in most cases just not present to be 'off'
example 'status=yes', 'status=1' and 'status' have identical results".

Does that note apply only to toolbar and chrome features and not to 
window functionality features?

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24590

Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote on 03 jun 2014 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Window.open>
> says that
> 
> "NOTE: All features can be set to yes, 1 or just be present to
> be 'on', set to no or 0 or in most cases just not present to be 'off'
> example 'status=yes', 'status=1' and 'status' have identical results".
> 
> Does that note apply only to toolbar and chrome features and not to 
> window functionality features?

I seem to remember the original [non-mozilla?] spec was different.

Perhaps the default "1" is cross-browser proven.


-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24601

Evertjan. wrote:

> Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote on 03 jun 2014 in
> comp.lang.javascript:

It is called attribution *line*, _not_ attribution novel.

>> To answer my own question, I just did this
>> 
>> var myPop = window.open("","","width=240,height=320,resizable,status=0);
>> myPop.document.open();
> 
> this .document.open() is not needed, it is implicit.

Only with HTML5:

<http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html5-20140204/webappapis.html#dom-document-write>

vs.

<http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-DOM-Level-2-HTML-20030109/html.html#ID-75233634>
 
>> myPop.document.write("<img src='images/puzzle.jpg' alt=''>");
>> myPop.document.close();
> 
> this .document.close() is not needed,

Wrong.  Because a script-created parser has no information about whether 
further content will be generated by script, the explicit document.close() 
is necessary to close the input stream for a document *created* with 
scripting.  Otherwise that document will load forever, and indicate that to 
the user by “wait”-shape pointer cursor.

<http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html5-20140204/webappapis.html#dynamic-markup-insertion>

> unless you want a second .document.write()
> to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()

No, a second document.write() call will send further content to the same 
input stream unless it has been closed.
 
-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24605

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote on 04 jun 2014 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

>> unless you want a second .document.write()
>> to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()
> 
> No, a second document.write() call will send further content to the same 
> input stream unless it has been closed.

It seems reading English is difficult for you, Thomas. 

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24606

Evertjan. wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote on 04 jun 2014 in
> comp.lang.javascript:

Will you ever learn?

>>> unless you want a second .document.write()
>>> to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()
>> 
>> No, a second document.write() call will send further content to the same
>> input stream unless it has been closed.
> 
> It seems reading English is difficult for you, Thomas.

Your statement

>>> this .document.close() is not needed,
>>> unless you want a second .document.write()
>>> to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()

is wrong.  document.close() is needed here in any case.  document.write() 
does not necessarily “induce the implicit .open()”.  And obviously it makes 
no sense at all to issue a document.close() followed by a document.write().

IOW, you have been writing nonsense.  So much for understanding English.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24608

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote on 04 jun 2014 in
comp.lang.javascript: 

> Evertjan. wrote:
> 
>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote on 04 jun 2014 in
>> comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> Will you ever learn?
> 
>>>> unless you want a second .document.write()
>>>> to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()
>>> 
>>> No, a second document.write() call will send further content to the
>>> same input stream unless it has been closed.
>> 
>> It seems reading English is difficult for you, Thomas.
> 
> Your statement
> 
>>>> this .document.close() is not needed,
>>>> unless you want a second .document.write()
>>>> to overwrite the document by inducing the implicit .open()
> 
> is wrong.  document.close() is needed here in any case. 
> document.write() does not necessarily “induce the implicit .open()”.

No, but a prior document.close() does, as I wrote.

>  And obviously it makes no sense at all to issue a document.close()
> followed by a document.close(). 

Perhaps to you, because you did not read correctly.
It is not the point if it makes sense, I described what happens.
Your postings often don't make sense, but thet are sent by you anyway.

However, as the document.close() before a document.write()
induces an implicit document.open(), it can be a way to 
clear the window for new html.

Obviously this makes some more sense, perhaps not to you,
when the destination is not the window the script is "on",
but not exclusively so.

> IOW, you have been writing nonsense.  So much for understanding English.

The first, quod non, does not imply 
that your understanding is that good, quod non,
your "obviously" already hinted at that, Thomas.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24607

On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>Evertjan. wrote:
>
>> Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote on 03 jun 2014 in
>> comp.lang.javascript:
>
>It is called attribution *line*, _not_ attribution novel.
  <snip>

It is 85 characters long, has been wrapped by the automation, and 
is completely inoffensive. It is a pseudo-header that obeys all 
the standards for headers.

On the other hand, the header
Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAGFBMVEXTxa4RFk5dUWANED8PFEfy7+MGBiW+n3ZNF/QuAAACaElEQVQ4jVXUwVOcMBQG8Dc7Rc4PUntdWV2uxjDpGaGeozOp1woar4jd5t/v9wLstMwsA/ntlxdCAgUc1hjTc9/JCZfGoo3wG3HdmdAWrIJRHe7GM/TmpY5VFefuVcAkkPbLIaN8rmPmjloyZxgyR3GuJ4K0AGtJ2htz8o7yqikm759fldQXaMpbDzjKAG+8v+AugVTOPO5DOjLvGtUYQwh0CPjnVMyGd+8/GfUB5nLKJDD2aLDh5HYyMDJGDwQIo2ZmZcKbowNmAdB/AzyFhrmF2MHRb0QJJfaAnwGB6orZhoykLzJtGwF/xpYxI1dswomiUj3gTuAIqCn/4C7cULwGNBtwMTk3Y4LfKB5YUaOKBKYtpplm7u0vip8tU1NWWyI/7XdcSuIDoMt6rVHMWT0DbjHPGqDqZVSa6zleLcUTcIKLoMv3ueJluALtAo9B302zPPlrtiVScRdCjXvVh3e3JpYa/jjkuC9N+LrBMlz/eAN4eQijX2EdLo6c5tGGHwLyHFtXk89dDGHwCVhG9T0S/j55AhRZgkMCmUQXJ49TnS1wnQDvw0eAh9ICeMmEFbCnPMFzjAvsWoEWEFdYEx+S0MoUZ1gT1wId8+AF3Bl2OoEu906AUHx5VLw/gXYg/x84loOah/2UYNrgiwSwGO7RfUzVBbx/kgpckumGOi6QirtD6gkLTitbnxNol47S2jVc2vsN5kPqaAHT8uUdAJM4v/DanjYOwmUjWznGfwB7sGtAtor5BgofDuzaRj4kSQAqDakTsKORa3Q3xKi3gE1fhl71KRMqrdZ2AWNNg/YOhQyrVBnb+i+nEg4bsDA+egAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==
is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.

  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24609

John Harris wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> 
> On the other hand, the header
> Face: [snipped content]
> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.

Why is it "antisocial"?

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24610

Christoph Michael Becker wrote:

> John Harris wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> 
>> On the other hand, the header
>> Face: [snipped content]
>> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.
> 
> Why is it "antisocial"?

It is not.  Do not feed the troll.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24614

On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 18:18:07 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>
>> John Harris wrote:
>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>>> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On the other hand, the header
>>> Face: [snipped content]
>>> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.
>> 
>> Why is it "antisocial"?
>
>It is not.  Do not feed the troll.

An addition to Beachcomber's Dictionary for Today (Beachcomber wasn't
his "real" name, but no-one objects) :

Troll :
1  A foolish person who repeatedly objects to 85 character
attributions.

2  Anyone who disagrees with the foolish person.


  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24613

On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:35:38 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
<cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:

>John Harris wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> 
>> On the other hand, the header
>> Face: [snipped content]
>> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.
>
>Why is it "antisocial"?

If an 85 character attribution is supposed to be anti-social then how
can a 950 character unstandardised optional header be anything else?

  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24615

John Harris wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:35:38 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:
> 
>> John Harris wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> On the other hand, the header
>>> Face: [snipped content]
>>> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.
>>
>> Why is it "antisocial"?
> 
> If an 85 character attribution is supposed to be anti-social then how
> can a 950 character unstandardised optional header be anything else?

To quote the FAQ[1]:

| It is also always in the best interest of any poster to the group to
| do everything within their power to behave in a way that makes it
| quick and easy for the people they expect to answer their questions
| to read and follow their posts, understand their questions and
| problems and comprehend and test posted code.

An (X-)Face header as well as a concise attribution line may be useful
to accomplish that goal, depending on the reader.

[1] <http://pointedears.de/scripts/faq/cljs/notes/posting/#ps1Intro>
    <http://www.jibbering.com/faq/notes/posting/#ps1Intro>
-- 
Christoph M. Becker

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24619

On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 17:43:15 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
<cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:

>John Harris wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:35:38 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
>> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> John Harris wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, the header
>>>> Face: [snipped content]
>>>> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.
>>>
>>> Why is it "antisocial"?
>> 
>> If an 85 character attribution is supposed to be anti-social then how
>> can a 950 character unstandardised optional header be anything else?
>
>To quote the FAQ[1]:
>
>| It is also always in the best interest of any poster to the group to
>| do everything within their power to behave in a way that makes it
>| quick and easy for the people they expect to answer their questions
>| to read and follow their posts, understand their questions and
>| problems and comprehend and test posted code.
>
>An (X-)Face header as well as a concise attribution line may be useful
>to accomplish that goal, depending on the reader.

Neither of my news readers does anything with a Face header. 

In addition, putting a picture in the sig in a text-only news group
would be severely criticised - I don't think putting it into a header
makes it any better.

  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24699

In comp.lang.javascript message <53g0p9pqtogh2nfe05c4fpo5k2v2u2uocq@4ax.
com>, Thu, 5 Jun 2014 11:03:50, John Harris
<niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> posted:

>On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:35:38 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
><cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:
>
>>John Harris wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>>><PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> On the other hand, the header
>>> Face: [snipped content]
>>> is an antisocial header used by a frequent poster to this news group.
>>
>>Why is it "antisocial"?
>
>If an 85 character attribution is supposed to be anti-social then how
>can a 950 character unstandardised optional header be anything else?

I'd rather get an unseen 950 character unstandardised optional header
than the copious visible spewings of the rubbery one.  Why can he not
following the example of one of Germany's famous leaders and invent
something useful?


-- 
 (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ¬@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.
   Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
 Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
 Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web