getElementById returns empty

[VK]

someone apparently living in a country which citizens are only beginning to

Neither one. At least your NNTP-Posting-Host header indicates that you are
located in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.

Is it? They promised me Moscow or something in Siberia... Thank you
for pointing out though St.Petersburg seems cool too (?) Maybe I
should drop Russia all together and start "residing" in Afghanistan?
That would be very conceptual but it is so hard to find a reliable
anonymizer in there...
About my hidden personality and anonymized IP I once explained back in
2004 in the post I couldn't find and again in 2006 at
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/63486d4517bfc4e0

I have a valid working e-mail address in my posts but I prefer to keep
it impossible to attach my Usenet identity to my real identity: I
don't mean technically (there is nothing impossible) but at least
legally. That gives me the valuable - to me - freedom to express
myself without fear of consequences if anyone of my current or former
customers will read it and will get upset on something. At the same
time of course I never disclose any sensitive business information,
but sometimes a wrong word may do a lot.

(Another clue is your often
not using articles where they are needed and posting in seemingly gibberish
which is indicative of a quick translation of thought Russian into written
English). However, that might not be the case, hence "apparently".

Oh... Did you ever think to join sci.lang? I am posting there
iether btw. Of course I am not a natural born American and I never
claimed that. I love my country and my children will be Americans, but
what a hey has it to do with Javascript? Actually in the Usenet it is
considered to be a mauvais ton to interrogate participants for OT
personal data ;-)
Still you can join Dr.Stockton: his current bet is that I am from
India. Get enough participants to your venture and if the bank gets
high enough I may tell you what country I came from to the US: 50% of
the bank to me, 50% between all right guesses. If no right guess then
the whole bank goes to me. Let me know if interested. ;-)

As I see it, Russia has still a long way to go from being a totalitarian
one-party state to a free democracy.

holly... is it still clj or alt.politics?

That includes granting fundamental
civil rights, such as the freedom of speech and freedom of press, which had
been established before but were restricted to a great extent by former
President Putin, notably for the most part in accordance with the current
constitution of the Russian Federation.

....yeah... that must be alt.politics. Going back to clj.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Is it? They promised me Moscow or something in Siberia... Thank you
for pointing out though St.Petersburg seems cool too (?) Maybe I
should drop Russia all together and start "residing" in Afghanistan?
That would be very conceptual but it is so hard to find a reliable
anonymizer in there...
About my hidden personality and anonymized IP I once explained back in
2004 in the post I couldn't find and again in 2006 at
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/63486d4517bfc4e0

I see. Nevertheless, by clarifying this you have confirmed my assessment
that you have a long way to go in understanding (your) civil rights.
Because that you don't have to create a "hidden personality" and don't have
to post anonymously in order to state your opinion is what our ancestors
*fought for* (and died for) and what many people are still fighting (and
dying) for. Posting anonymously like that is diminishing their struggle and
disregarding their achievements; it is a step backwards into the Dark Ages,
as is your saying that people are only entitled to their opinion in private.

holly... is it still clj or alt.politics?

It was required to explain why I wrote what I wrote before.


PointedEars

 

[John G Harris]

LOL. Yet as you wish... Anyone is entitled on his own private opinion
as long as it remains private (other words unless you are hired to do
a commercial project).

Slavishly following a principle without thinking about it can be quite
dangerous. I remember a software team that created a comms product that
was 10 times too slow to be sellable. But it conformed to a principle
they chose at the beginning of the project. Luckily, someone was brought
in who could see where their code could be speeded up.

So, it's not a private opinion. It's the result of being hired to do
commercial projects, and the result of seeing other people do commercial
projects, some done well, some done badly.

<body> element is not a form field and <body onload=".."> is not <form
onsubmit="...">

What are you talking about?

<body onload=".."> is the legacy equivalent of in-script window.onload
handler and it is out of the wide use since NN4/IE4
But again, as anyone wishes... I guess it is a bizzarity contest
morning here today.

I don't think HTML 4.01 is a legacy standard. You, of course, might
think it is.

John

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Jeff North meinte:

What "standard" are you talking about?

Since window.onload is actually proprietary - according to W3C standards
it may be used with body or frameset elements - you can either choose a
non-standard handler or violate your "standard of separation".

I think I know what you meant to say, but the way you said it it is wrong
which may have lead to a following misunderstanding. Just to clarify:

W3C standards do not define (yet) where/whether `window.onload' may be used;
they (particularly W3C DOM Level 2 HTML) define which element objects could
have a standardized `onload' property. Insofar you are correct: only `body'
element objects (implementing the HTMLBodyElement interface) and `frameset'
element objects (implementing the HTMLFramesetElement interface) could have
a *standardized* `onload' property.

However, you are also incorrect, because the object referred to by `window'
is not an element object, although it is a host object. It does not matter
that there are element objects to have a standardized property of that name.

So the plausible argument about `window.onload' being non-standard would be
instead to show that there is no such standard (yet). BTDT


Regards,

PointedEars

 

[John G Harris]

a. This is NOT separating script from HTML.

Yes it is, if the "..." is one function call. I agree with you that it
would be bad to put several lines of javascript in there.

b. I haven't argued against the onload function.
c. The onload function should be placed within the <script></script>
region.

Oh? Surely your principle says you *must* put it in a js file.

Are you saying that MS has broken the web (again)?

Do you know when is the earliest you can do
window.onload = init;
and when is the latest?

There's no uncertainty about

Now, replace the word javascript with CSS in the above paragraph and
you have a good example why separation of code, css and HTML should be
done.

It's interesting you should say that. If you look inside a css file you
may well see something like

BODY { ... }
H1 { ... }
P { ... }

You can see that the links between HTML elements and css declarations
are put in the css file instead of the HTML file. It's the same
principle though.

Of course, your principle will say you mustn't put HTML in the css file,
so we *must* do

.paragraph1 { ... }
.paragraph2 { ... }
.paragraph3 { ... }

and so on. Or are you more sensible than that?

-- -------------------------------------------------------------
(e-mail address removed) : Remove your pants to reply
-- -------------------------------------------------------------

Your sig-separator is broken.

John

 

[Bart Van der Donck]

Is it? They promised me Moscow or something in Siberia... Thank you
for pointing out though St.Petersburg seems cool too (?) Maybe I
should drop Russia all together and start "residing" in Afghanistan?
That would be very conceptual but it is so hard to find a reliable
anonymizer in there...

Nah VK you have Russian roots for sure It's such a typical way of
(post-)Sovjet thinking "Opinion is only for private rooms" Russian
kitchens are famous for that, right I will stay in Minsk for 4
weeks again soon. It's already my fifth stay; I'm working for many
years with my team there and my girlfriend is from there too. I know
how things work there

By the way, I'm teaching as guest professor in Minsk State University
during May. That shouldn't be too far from you, and RU/BLR border
doesn't require visa for Russians. You're welcome!

Then about Mr Lahn's statements. Tiring as usual, but this time it's
interesting to see how he adopts elementary pro-western ideology
without thinking or even questioning motives or sources. I see the
Western system has brainwashed him very well; he forgets that it's
always an ideology, and never a norm. Like me, Mr Lahn is brought up
in this ideology and thinks that this is the right way to live. Yeah
yeah Europe does "so many great things" and "we have the best system".
It's partly true, yes, but this system is only successfull as long as
new markets are created; why else would E.U. always allow new
countries ? Create new markets, dump your (rest) products and keep
rich. New economies like China, Brazil and Russia have much more
potential, and they will get the focus sooner or later.

Lahn is no humanist and no gentleman, and that attitude will keep him
on the low-level code ground, but I think there's still hope that this
may change Software is not about technocratic purists; that's only
level 0 from the building. People who cannot see the right proportions
of the technical base-rules are condemned to write code behing a PC
all their life.

It's tempting to classify Mr Lahn as a neurotic Befehl-ist-Befehl-
German who always needs some higher entity to justify his reasoning.
By the way, did you know that Germans never smile when they hear a
good joke ? They just say "Excellent." Such irony is of course
easy, but never forget that it were the Russians who won both World
Wars and Germany started them

Mr Lahn is right to defend free speech. But he takes it as a dogma,
and hasn't seen yet how it can be abused too. In jurisdiction, the
Western base rule "In Our Heads" turns the courts into plays of
advocates who make up their own fantasies and strategies, miles away
from reality; free speech procudes an enormous noise-to-signal ratio
too (by definition). If I don't like you and live in USA, I can sue
you because you farted, and walk away with a mountain of money. Better
to know court rules as American. This is a very bad system.

Former Sovjet citizens are afraid of these strong individuals of the
West; and Western people are afraid of the much stronger collective
force in the East under (post-)communism. Even for me it's difficult
to grasp to mean absolutely nothing as individual (like under
communism). The inheritance still continues today.

The great thing about Europe is that the system allows traditionally
socialistic elements in the policy (like mandatory medical insurance,
retirements, etc.) which makes it stronger than the USA. The recent
credit crisis in USA is such a typical example: Americans are used to
this bluff - and if you pick in their balloon, there is nothing in it
(generalization, of course).

...yeah... that must be alt.politics. Going back to clj.

Uhm... agreed

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Then about Mr Lahn's statements. Tiring as usual, but this time it's
interesting to see how he adopts elementary pro-western ideology
without thinking or even questioning motives or sources. I see the
Western system has brainwashed him very well; he forgets that it's
always an ideology, and never a norm.

Quite the contrary, it would seem you missed the point.

I just criticized the Russian administration and legislation for the way it
is now (as I could go on criticizing other governments and legislations,
most notably the United States of America under the Bush administration, and
even that of my home country), and VK for the way he argued and behaves
regarding the subject of free speech. There was no comparison with "the
Western system" involved, nor was it my intention to convey a sense of
superiority of one above the other.

And JFYI: Freedom of speech is one of the rights granted by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (Articles 18 and 19), so it cannot be considered
a matter of interpretation or part of an (Western) ideology.

Enough said.


PointedEars

 

[Bart Van der Donck]

Quite the contrary, it would seem you missed the point.

Logical consequence of this statement: you conclude that Western
society *is* the norm. Bad conclusion.

I just criticized the Russian administration and legislation for the way it
is now

Which is a very right critique IMO.

(as I could go on criticizing other governments and legislations,
most notably the United States of America under the Bush administration, and
even that of my home country), and VK for the way he argued and behaves
regarding the subject of free speech.  There was no comparison with "the
Western system" involved, nor was it my intention to convey a sense of
superiority of one above the other.

And JFYI: Freedom of speech is one of the rights granted by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (Articles 18 and 19), so it cannot be considered
a matter of interpretation or part of an (Western) ideology.

Absolutely. That's why I said you were right to defend freedom of
speech.

 

[beegee]

WRONG!!!!!!!
This goes against the standard of separating HTML,CSS and Javascript.
YOU are embedding Javascript within a HTML tag.

I think you're talking about the unobtrusive javascript programming
paradigm. While this is good practice, it is certainly not a
standard. Unfortunately, the whole unobtrusive javascript movement
was created for non-programmers and bad programmers. Most experienced
web hands have been doing something like it for years. On the other
hand, most experienced web programmers know that the easiest way to
insure that all DOM elements have been rendered before manipulating
them is to do so in an onload handler. (NOTE to "analysts": I said
'easiest')

I doubt unobtrusive javascript will ever be a standard as it becomes
quite silly when rigidly enforced.

Bob

 

[Laurent vilday]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :

Anyway, no matter whether you are a Russian citizen, ISTM you still have
a long way to go in understanding fundamental civil rights such as free speech.

Irrelevant. What is your javascript issue ?

 

[Laurent vilday]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :

Quite the contrary, it would seem you missed the point.

LOL. I was expecting the usual Lahn's argument : "you miss my point !"

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Logical consequence of this statement: you conclude that Western
society *is* the norm.

Non sequitur, and no.

Bad conclusion.

Yes, indeed.


PointedEars

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

I think you're talking about the unobtrusive javascript programming
paradigm. While this is good practice,
IBTD.

it is certainly not a standard
ACK.

Unfortunately, the whole unobtrusive javascript movement
was created for non-programmers and bad programmers.

.... by non-programmers and bad programmers. Because nobody competent would
recommend or use something less compatible and less efficient in favor of
something more compatible and more efficient just for the sake of seeming
separation. This has been discussed before.


PointedEars

 

[VK]

Thomas Lahn:
"This is called the freedom of speech
and is one of the great and important
achievements of modern civilization."

Bart Van der Donck:
"It's such a typical way of (post-)Sovjet thinking
"Opinion is only for private rooms" Russian
kitchens are famous for that, right "

Wow, guys, you have just killed me! Such profound freedom-
analyzing responses for a few of my words said: just like in some
Berkley or something Not to say I do disagree with everything
neither I do agree with everything: it is just OT even as comments on
my "freedom of speech" expression. You both have missed the point of
my Usenet "anonymousity". I am not hiding myself from some kind of a
governmental prosecution for political or social ideas expressed at
c.l.j. and other NGs. AFAIK a strict distinction between Javascript
Object and Array entities and other issues of the kind are not a
question of the state security neither in the US nor in EU nor in
Russia nor even in China I simply prefer do not be mapped by my
current and former customers: not because I am disclosing some
sensitive info about them but simply because many people do not like
to be discussed, even if their names are not indicated but if they can
identify themselves by the name of the poster who's telling the story
and by the time of the post. This is all of it.

@Bart Van der Donck:
I would be glad to meet you and thank you for the invitation. It may
be not very possible exactly this time, alas: but thank you anyway.