Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #9300, comment 5


Ignore:
Timestamp:
May 15, 2013, 9:28:17 AM (7 years ago)
Author:
jaredjacobs
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #9300, comment 5

    initial v1  
    11You and I agree that the relevant HTML is non-conforming. However, I don't agree that the use case is invalid. There's a difference. Users often want to do things to documents written by one author using third-party scripts written by a different author. The third-party script authors don't have control over the global structure of the HTML document. Users don't care; they just want the third-party script to work.
    22
    3 Take a look at the list of "intended scenarios" for using jQuery 2.0 (under '''How to Use It''' at http://blog.jquery.com/2013/04/18/jquery-2-0-released/). Browser extensions and add-ons are clearly listed. They are third-party script scenarios.
     3Take a look at the list of "intended scenarios" for using jQuery 2.0 (under '''How to Use It''' at http://blog.jquery.com/2013/04/18/jquery-2-0-released/). Note that browser extensions and add-ons are listed. They are third-party script scenarios.
    44
    5 You're in charge. If you'd like me to add a test to my pull request, I'd be happy to. If you just want me to go away, well, I can do that too. And if you're finding working on jQuery too demanding or stressful, well... it might be time to consider something new. http://www.42go.com/join_us.html Cheers!
     5You're in charge. If you'd like me to add a test to my pull request, I'd be happy to. If you just want me to go away, well, I can do that too. And if you're finding working on jQuery too demanding or stressful, well... it might be time for a vacation or to consider something new. http://www.42go.com/join_us.html Cheers!