<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Six JavaScript Features</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer</link>
	<description>My random mumblings about web development and PC hardware.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:49:37 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-7118</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:52:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-7118</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think you understood me Josh. I was saying, make the page look like how you want for people without JavaScript, then for those with JavaScript, modify what&#039;s there to look like how you want it to look for those with JavaScript. By doing it that way, noscript is not needed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think you understood me Josh. I was saying, make the page look like how you want for people without JavaScript, then for those with JavaScript, modify what&#8217;s there to look like how you want it to look for those with JavaScript. By doing it that way, noscript is not needed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: josh</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-7104</link>
		<dc:creator>josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:41:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-7104</guid>
		<description>&quot;#
 - Here I also agree, itâ€™s easy enough to manipulate the existing content with JavaScript if you want it to be displayed in a different way or (for some reason) not displayed at all, therefore there is no need for .
#&quot;

I disagree. The reason to use  is so that browsers without javascript (enabled) can render the content you would want to be rendered only in that scenario.
I don&#039;t understand how otherwise manipulating the  content with javascript is going to work if javascript itself doesn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;#<br />
 &#8211; Here I also agree, itâ€™s easy enough to manipulate the existing content with JavaScript if you want it to be displayed in a different way or (for some reason) not displayed at all, therefore there is no need for .<br />
#&#8221;</p>
<p>I disagree. The reason to use  is so that browsers without javascript (enabled) can render the content you would want to be rendered only in that scenario.<br />
I don&#8217;t understand how otherwise manipulating the  content with javascript is going to work if javascript itself doesn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert F.</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-102</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert F.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Nov 2005 04:32:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-102</guid>
		<description>Hey, you can put &quot;Till&quot; on us. It&#039;s from Middle English, us Americans brought it with us from England. Don&#039;t try to excuse your ignorance. :-P

I agree with you David on all your points.  What&#039;s wrong with javscript: as a URL protocol? The data: protocol is a standard, but technically it&#039;s not linking to a document, as it is the document. Same idea with the javascript: protocol.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, you can put &#8220;Till&#8221; on us. It&#8217;s from Middle English, us Americans brought it with us from England. Don&#8217;t try to excuse your ignorance. <img src='http://www.hddkillers.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':-P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I agree with you David on all your points.  What&#8217;s wrong with javscript: as a URL protocol? The data: protocol is a standard, but technically it&#8217;s not linking to a document, as it is the document. Same idea with the javascript: protocol.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Rogers</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-101</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Rogers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Nov 2005 03:23:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-101</guid>
		<description>No you didn&#039;t, fuzz, it&#039;s still absent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No you didn&#8217;t, fuzz, it&#8217;s still absent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lilcrazyfuzzy</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-99</link>
		<dc:creator>lilcrazyfuzzy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:11:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-99</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Hmm, didnâ€™t know that. The only uses for the word till that I knew were to mean cash register and ploughing.&lt;/em&gt;
must be an american thing :p

btw, did you see, did you see? i got my gravatar (after a whole week!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Hmm, didnâ€™t know that. The only uses for the word till that I knew were to mean cash register and ploughing.</em><br />
must be an american thing :p</p>
<p>btw, did you see, did you see? i got my gravatar (after a whole week!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:19:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-97</guid>
		<description>Hmm, didn&#039;t know that. The only uses for the word till that I knew were to mean cash register and ploughing.

Yeah, I guess it can be handy to use document.write somtimes, such as using it to write out a bookmarklet link. document.write can be replaced with a bit of DOM though, and yeah It involves some slightly longer code, but it works with application/xhtml+xml.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm, didn&#8217;t know that. The only uses for the word till that I knew were to mean cash register and ploughing.</p>
<p>Yeah, I guess it can be handy to use document.write somtimes, such as using it to write out a bookmarklet link. document.write can be replaced with a bit of DOM though, and yeah It involves some slightly longer code, but it works with application/xhtml+xml.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Fenocchi</title>
		<link>http://www.hddkillers.com/2005/11/six-javascript-features-we-may-or-may-not-need-any-longer/comment-page-1#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Fenocchi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hddkillers.com/?p=23#comment-96</guid>
		<description>I think that document.write() and  still have some practical uses, but 99% of the time they are a bad choice. Other than that, I agree with your agree/disagree statements.

Oh yeah, and it&#039;s proper to use &quot;till&quot; instead of &quot;&#039;til.&quot; From http://www.answers.com/till ...

&lt;blockquote cite=&quot;http://www.answers.com/till&quot;&gt;
USAGE NOTE   Till and until are generally interchangeable in both writing and speech, though as the first word in a sentence until is usually preferred: Until you get that paper written, don&#039;t even think about going to the movies.â€¢Till is actually the older word, with until having been formed by the addition to it of the prefix unâ€“, meaning â€œup to.â€ In the 18th century the spelling &#039;till became fashionable, as if till were a shortened form of until. Although &#039;till is now nonstandard, &#039;til is sometimes used in this way and is considered acceptable, though it is etymologically incorrect.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that document.write() and  still have some practical uses, but 99% of the time they are a bad choice. Other than that, I agree with your agree/disagree statements.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, and it&#8217;s proper to use &#8220;till&#8221; instead of &#8220;&#8217;til.&#8221; From <a href="http://www.answers.com/till" rel="nofollow">http://www.answers.com/till</a> &#8230;</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.answers.com/till"><p>
USAGE NOTE   Till and until are generally interchangeable in both writing and speech, though as the first word in a sentence until is usually preferred: Until you get that paper written, don&#8217;t even think about going to the movies.â€¢Till is actually the older word, with until having been formed by the addition to it of the prefix unâ€“, meaning â€œup to.â€ In the 18th century the spelling &#8217;till became fashionable, as if till were a shortened form of until. Although &#8217;till is now nonstandard, &#8217;til is sometimes used in this way and is considered acceptable, though it is etymologically incorrect.
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

