local/global scope confusion

[The Natural Philosopher]

Re: local/global scope confusion

Evertjan. wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote on 17 nov 2008 in comp.lang.javas cript:
>

>>>see point above. Why doesn't javascript have PROPER access to these
>>>elements?
>>Because the browser does not provide it, not a Javascript issue, but a
>>sensible one securitywize.
>>>

>Theres a difference between being able to determine attributes of style,
>and being able to rob the user of his files...
>>

>
Style is not Javascript, you could try CSS, but do reply in a PROPER NG.
>

such a nice friendly group. Just like the language.

[Joost Diepenmaat]

Re: local/global scope confusion

The Natural Philosopher <a@b.cwrites:

such a nice friendly group. Just like the language.

Oh shut up.


--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/

[Jorge]

Re: local/global scope confusion

On Nov 17, 11:22 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.cwrot e:

Trevor Lawrence wrote:

Thanks Evertjan and Jorge
Your answers gave precisely the info. I needed, even though my questionmay
have been a little unclear.

>

I have noticed that many other replies in this NG have not been as polite
and helpful

>
One of the reasons I don't normally hang out here.
>
There are two people who actually really help..Erwin Moller is one, and
I forget the other..
>
There are about 3-4 who try, but often don't really understand the problem.
>
The rest are probably here because they can't actually write javascript,
(IMHO an entirely reasonable thing) but like to think they can (entirely
unreasonable !)
>

Yeah, the normal, the abnormal and the ones who imitate the abnormal.
Normal people would never dare to spit in the first place, in the face
of someone whom you don't know at all an "are you too lazy or too
stupid ?". That's absolutely disrespectful and crude and inexcusable
and abnormal. Sure, not big enough eggs to behave so face to face, but
parapeted far away behind the network... in a word: a psychopathology .

--
Jorge.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Re: local/global scope confusion

Jorge wrote:

On Nov 17, 11:22 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.cwrot e:

>Trevor Lawrence wrote:

>>Thanks Evertjan and Jorge
>>Your answers gave precisely the info. I needed, even though my question may
>>have been a little unclear.
>>I have noticed that many other replies in this NG have not been as polite
>>and helpful

>One of the reasons I don't normally hang out here.
>>
>There are two people who actually really help..Erwin Moller is one, and
>I forget the other..
>>
>There are about 3-4 who try, but often don't really understand the problem.
>>
>The rest are probably here because they can't actually write javascript,
>(IMHO an entirely reasonable thing) but like to think they can (entirely
>unreasonable !)
>>

>
Yeah, the normal, the abnormal and the ones who imitate the abnormal.
Normal people would never dare to spit in the first place, in the face
of someone whom you don't know at all an "are you too lazy or too
stupid ?". That's absolutely disrespectful and crude and inexcusable
and abnormal. Sure, not big enough eggs to behave so face to face, but
parapeted far away behind the network... in a word: a psychopathology .
>

I remember the days of Usenet, when you would, via a 9600 modem,ask.

"how the heck to I get my printer working on Sys4 Unix?

and somebody would cut and paste or retype - the appropriate config from
their working setup.

bandwidth was almpost to low for abuse, as were latencies..to high.

Of course we are ignorant: that's why we are asking.

Lazy and stupid?..not many.

--
Jorge.

[kangax]

Re: local/global scope confusion

On Nov 17, 10:46 am, Joost Diepenmaat <jo...@zeekat.n lwrote:

The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.cwrites :
>

such a nice friendly group. Just like the language.

>
Oh shut up.

Let's not feed the troll.

>
--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog:http://joost.zeekat.nl/| work:http://zeekat.nl/

--
kangax

[Michael Wojcik]

Re: local/global scope confusion

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>
I remember the days of Usenet,

.... which obviously have not ended, since this is posted to a Usenet
newsgroup ...

when you would, via a 9600 modem,

I assume that means a modem running in a 9600 bps mode. I'm sure
plenty of us remember reading Usenet over slower connections. I read
Usenet from shell accounts over 1200 bps async dialup connections, and
I'm not an old-timer by Usenet standards.

>ask.
>
"how the heck to I get my printer working on Sys4 Unix?

That would be an odd question, since UNIX System IV was never
released. Perhaps you're thinking of System V Release 4 (SVR4).

bandwidth was almpost to low for abuse, as were latencies..to high.

As with most argumentum ad verecundiam, this narrative is more fantasy
than history. The prelapsarian age of Usenet, before "abuse" of
various sorts, certainly had ended before 9600 bps async modems were
widely available. ITU v.29 was issued in 1988. By that time we had
*parodies* of abuse on Usenet - Joe Talmadge created "BIFF" in 1988,
according to the net.legends FAQ.

A few minutes' research would have shown that. But I suppose argument
from personal anecdote is the preferred technique of natural philosophy.

Of course we are ignorant: that's why we are asking.

That's no reason to be arrogant, insulting, presumptuous, and prone to
posting inane and spurious generalizations , as in "there are two
people who actually really help" or "the rest are probably here
because they can't actually write javascript".

Those sins are forgivable, to an extent, in those who are both experts
(because they provide value) and regulars (because they've
demonstrated their willingness to continue participating in the
discussion). Tourists have no such excuse.

--
Michael Wojcik
Micro Focus
Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University

[Trevor Lawrence]

Re: local/global scope confusion

Well, I started the discussion on being helpful, but I don't want to
continue it

What I don't understand is the statement "this is posted to a Usenet
newsgroup ..."

So far as I know, this is just another NG. I first started corresponding on
the msnews NGs and then later on a private group. However, I was informed on
one NG that c.l.j. is more relevant to Javascript.
What makes c.l.j. different?
Are there Usenet NGs and non-Usenet NGs?

--
Trevor Lawrence
Canberra
Web Site http://trevorl.mvps.org

"Michael Wojcik" <mwojcik@newsgu y.comwrote in message
news:gfsud112ch 8@news3.newsguy .com...

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>>
>I remember the days of Usenet,

>
... which obviously have not ended, since this is posted to a Usenet
newsgroup ...
>

>when you would, via a 9600 modem,

>
I assume that means a modem running in a 9600 bps mode. I'm sure
plenty of us remember reading Usenet over slower connections. I read
Usenet from shell accounts over 1200 bps async dialup connections, and
I'm not an old-timer by Usenet standards.
>

>>ask.
>>
>"how the heck to I get my printer working on Sys4 Unix?

>
That would be an odd question, since UNIX System IV was never
released. Perhaps you're thinking of System V Release 4 (SVR4).
>

>bandwidth was almpost to low for abuse, as were latencies..to high.

>
As with most argumentum ad verecundiam, this narrative is more fantasy
than history. The prelapsarian age of Usenet, before "abuse" of
various sorts, certainly had ended before 9600 bps async modems were
widely available. ITU v.29 was issued in 1988. By that time we had
*parodies* of abuse on Usenet - Joe Talmadge created "BIFF" in 1988,
according to the net.legends FAQ.
>
A few minutes' research would have shown that. But I suppose argument
from personal anecdote is the preferred technique of natural philosophy.
>

>Of course we are ignorant: that's why we are asking.

>
That's no reason to be arrogant, insulting, presumptuous, and prone to
posting inane and spurious generalizations , as in "there are two
people who actually really help" or "the rest are probably here
because they can't actually write javascript".
>
Those sins are forgivable, to an extent, in those who are both experts
(because they provide value) and regulars (because they've
demonstrated their willingness to continue participating in the
discussion). Tourists have no such excuse.
>
--
Michael Wojcik
Micro Focus
Rhetoric & Writing, Michigan State University

[Matthias Watermann]

Re: local/global scope confusion

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:41:40 +0000, Trevor Lawrence wrote:

[...]
Are there Usenet NGs and non-Usenet NGs?

Yes. Ask your favourite search engine for "Usenet" and "NNTP" (which is
the protocol used to distribute the news). And lookup the <news.answers >
group for FAQs regarding your question.

In contrast to the freely and worldwide distributed newsgroups (with
thousands of peering newsservers around the globe) there are lot of groups
hosted by a single news provider (e.g. an organisation {like Eclipse} or a
commercial company {like Google} or anybody else who likes to do so) where
the respective newsgroups are available only for readers directly
connected with that very news host.

A third class of NGs you could call "pseudo groups": Initially mailing
lists (with individual members mailing to the list) someone converts
those emails to newsgroup messages (for example mail to the
<debian-user-german@lists.de bian.orgmailing list is gated to the
<linux.debian.u ser.germannewsg roup which in turn might be available
at some Usenet newsservers.

It might seem a bit confusing at first glance, but once you've got the
hang of it (and a decent newsreader) it's quite easy. But, anyway, this
is clearly off-topic in _this_ newsgroup, hence you should look for a
newsgroup more appropriate to discuss your questions about how the
Usenet works.


--
Matthias
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
X - AGAINST M$ ATTACHMENTS
/ \

[The Natural Philosopher]

Re: local/global scope confusion

Trevor Lawrence wrote:

Well, I started the discussion on being helpful, but I don't want to
continue it
>
What I don't understand is the statement "this is posted to a Usenet
newsgroup ..."
>
So far as I know, this is just another NG. I first started corresponding on
the msnews NGs and then later on a private group. However, I was informed on
one NG that c.l.j. is more relevant to Javascript.
What makes c.l.j. different?
Are there Usenet NGs and non-Usenet NGs?
>

No. its all Usenet, except no one calls it that any more.

[John W Kennedy]

Re: local/global scope confusion

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Trevor Lawrence wrote:

>Well, I started the discussion on being helpful, but I don't want to
>continue it
>>
>What I don't understand is the statement "this is posted to a Usenet
>newsgroup ..."
>>
>So far as I know, this is just another NG. I first started
>correspondin g on the msnews NGs and then later on a private group.
>However, I was informed on one NG that c.l.j. is more relevant to
>Javascript.
>What makes c.l.j. different?
>Are there Usenet NGs and non-Usenet NGs?
>>

No. its all Usenet, except no one calls it that any more.

According to some, USENET is restricted to the Big 8.

And note that all public newsgroups are Google Groups, but not all
Google Groups are newsgroups.
--
John W. Kennedy
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and
Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes.
The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being
corrected."
-- G. K. Chesterton

[Trevor Lawrence]

Re: local/global scope confusion

"David Mark" <dmark.cinsoft@ gmail.comwrote in message
news:5710db64-6240-47b4-8015-5c46d1dc4671@c2 2g2000prc.googl egroups.com...
On Nov 17, 5:22 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.cwrot e:

Trevor Lawrence wrote:

Thanks Evertjan and Jorge
Your answers gave precisely the info. I needed, even though my question
may
have been a little unclear.

>

I have noticed that many other replies in this NG have not been as
polite
and helpful

>
One of the reasons I don't normally hang out here.
>
[snip]

There was lots of rambling here

My question is
What is your problem ?
If someone gives a reasonable answer, then why does it need to be pull apart
and dissected? (I think l am being tautologous here.)

--
Trevor Lawrence
Canberra
Web Site http://trevorl.mvps.org

[David Mark]

Re: local/global scope confusion

On Nov 19, 1:30 am, "Trevor Lawrence" <Trevor L.@Canberrawrot e:

"David Mark" <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote in message
>
news:5710db64-6240-47b4-8015-5c46d1dc4671@c2 2g2000prc.googl egroups.com...
On Nov 17, 5:22 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.cwrot e:
>

Trevor Lawrence wrote:

Thanks Evertjan and Jorge
Your answers gave precisely the info. I needed, even though my question
may
have been a little unclear.

>

I have noticed that many other replies in this NG have not been as
polite
and helpful

>

One of the reasons I don't normally hang out here.

>

[snip]

>
There was lots of rambling here
>
My question is
What is your problem ?

Hard to tell what you are referring to from what you quoted. I was
talking to "The Natural Philosopher", who answered nothing.

If someone gives a reasonable answer, then why does it need to be pull apart
and dissected? (I think l am being tautologous here.)
>

I think you misread something.

[Dr J R Stockton]

Re: local/global scope confusion

In comp.lang.javas cript message <4922f681$0$487 0$607ed4bc@cv.n et>, Tue,
18 Nov 2008 12:07:08, John W Kennedy <jwkenne@attglo bal.netposted:

>
>And note that all public newsgroups are Google Groups, but not all
>Google Groups are newsgroups.

IMHO, it would be wiser to use the term "Google Groups" to refer only to
those residing only at Google, although not to rely on others doing
likewise.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.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)