Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="David Mark, post: 4961922"] Sounds good to me. I have always tested manually and it is time- consuming. [snip] Right. I am basing my recommendations for the initial low-level functionality based on what is used by my higher-level modules. [snip] It is impossible to exactly simulate DOMContentLoaded, but that has never been a goal of mine. I simple stopped using onload by itself (it is used as a fallback for situations when the DOMContentLoaded event or simulation fails to work.) In a nutshell, a timeout set at the bottom of the page calls the listener (and this is always optional as onload used as a fallback.) As long as a page degrades gracefully without script, then the split second that the content is visible without enhancement is not an issue. In cases where the layout changes dramatically on enhancement, I add style rules to hide certain content during the page load. [snip] This automated testing suite should help that. But if only one person is handling documentation and everybody else is adding and scrutinizing code, then a bottleneck will always exist. It will certainly fill a glaring need once the basic foundation is in place. After that, I'm sure the popularity will increase exponentially. [/QUOTE]