Re: Alternative and fast option to some very useful jQuery features?

Newsgroups	comp.lang.javascript
Subject	Re: Alternative and fast option to some very useful jQuery features?
From	"Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net>
References	(5 earlier) <b1217b03-6f5f-4bde-a5a0-614f7d6117a4@googlegroups.com> <XnsA73E706C34B5Ceejj99@194.109.6.166> <07e760a7-1b58-45ab-ab46-7850e104a425@googlegroups.com> <XnsA7405DAEEE4E8eejj99@194.109.6.166> <75fb3301-67c0-4c7a-ae12-4af3220526d8@googlegroups.com>
Date	2017-03-24 09:15 +0100
Message-ID	<XnsA7425E27DF2ABeejj99@194.109.6.166> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> 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)

Thread

csiph-web