Unknown runtime error

[sheldonlg]

I have googled for '"Internet Explorer" "Unknown runtime error"' and not
found anything useful. I have the following (for simplicity of
presentation here):

<div><table><tr ><th id="foo"></th></tr></table></div>

In my javascript I have two lines:

var titleObj = document.getEle mentById('foo') ;
titleObj.innerH TML = "Name is bar";

IE6 is throwing an "Unknown runtime error" at the second line.

What can I do about it?

[Ugo]

What can I do about it?

Mmmm, do you wait for onloading the page?

[sheldonlg]

Ugo wrote:

>What can I do about it?

Mmmm, do you wait for onloading the page?

The page is already loaded. This occurs when clicking a button on the
page that brings up the div (making it visible, that is). This line is
part of that javascript that presents the box.

[Ugo]

>>What can I do about it?

>Mmmm, do you wait for onloading the page?

The page is already loaded. This occurs when clicking a button on the
page that brings up the div (making it visible, that is). This line is
part of that javascript that presents the box.

You add the text when the table is hidden? and then you make it visible?
If it is so, IE could get angry...

[Dr J R Stockton]

In comp.lang.javas cript message <-5KdnXsg_YpthYLV nZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2 d@gigane
ws.com>, Mon, 5 May 2008 10:25:28, sheldonlg <sheldonlg@?.?. invalid>
posted:

>
Thank you for your suggestion. When I made that change, all hell broke
loose in the rendering of the table. Investigating, I found that my
error had nothing to do with this problem. There was an <input
type="hidden"i n the table. I had failed to close that with the "
/>". Apparently, Firefox was smart to enough to say "Dummy, you forgot
to close this so I will do it for you", and rendered the table as I
wanted it. When I fixed the error, IE also displayed properly and
without a JS error.

Restore the error, then see what W3's downloadable TIDY (used as a
checker) and also an on-line tester say about it. I predict that you
will then form the habit of using them.

<FAQENTRYSectio n 2.3.
Add something on the desirability of verifying HTML before worrying
about what the script seems to do; particularly before posting.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, 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)

[sheldonlg]

Dr J R Stockton wrote:

In comp.lang.javas cript message <-5KdnXsg_YpthYLV nZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2 d@gigane
ws.com>, Mon, 5 May 2008 10:25:28, sheldonlg <sheldonlg@?.?. invalid>
posted:

>Thank you for your suggestion. When I made that change, all hell broke
loose in the rendering of the table. Investigating, I found that my
error had nothing to do with this problem. There was an <input
type="hidden"i n the table. I had failed to close that with the "
/>". Apparently, Firefox was smart to enough to say "Dummy, you forgot
to close this so I will do it for you", and rendered the table as I
wanted it. When I fixed the error, IE also displayed properly and
without a JS error.

Restore the error, then see what W3's downloadable TIDY (used as a
checker) and also an on-line tester say about it. I predict that you
will then form the habit of using them.

<FAQENTRYSectio n 2.3.
Add something on the desirability of verifying HTML before worrying
about what the script seems to do; particularly before posting.

I wish I could do that. However, if I do a "view source", all I see is
the template. This is on an AJAX foundation using php to write the
html. From what I have researched on the web, the validator can't be
used with php, let alone html that is written at run time via AJAX.

If I am wrong, them please enlighten me. I would love to check for
errors by validations. As it is, I found this by taking my code and
cutting and pasting into a dreamweaver window and then manually
indenting and examining it line by line. (I just indented the print
statements as I would have done for the tage).

[nobody]

On Mon, 05 May 2008 21:12:46 -0400, sheldonlg <sheldonlgwrote :

>Dr J R Stockton wrote:

>In comp.lang.javas cript message <-5KdnXsg_YpthYLV nZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2 d@gigane
ws.com>, Mon, 5 May 2008 10:25:28, sheldonlg <sheldonlg@?.?. invalid>
posted:

>>Thank you for your suggestion. When I made that change, all hell broke
loose in the rendering of the table. Investigating, I found that my
error had nothing to do with this problem. There was an <input
type="hidden" in the table. I had failed to close that with the "
/>". Apparently, Firefox was smart to enough to say "Dummy, you forgot
to close this so I will do it for you", and rendered the table as I
wanted it. When I fixed the error, IE also displayed properly and
without a JS error.

Restore the error, then see what W3's downloadable TIDY (used as a
checker) and also an on-line tester say about it. I predict that you
will then form the habit of using them.

<FAQENTRYSecti on 2.3.
Add something on the desirability of verifying HTML before worrying
about what the script seems to do; particularly before posting.

I wish I could do that. However, if I do a "view source", all I see is
the template. This is on an AJAX foundation using php to write the
html. From what I have researched on the web, the validator can't be
used with php, let alone html that is written at run time via AJAX.

If I am wrong, them please enlighten me. I would love to check for
errors by validations. As it is, I found this by taking my code and
cutting and pasting into a dreamweaver window and then manually
indenting and examining it line by line. (I just indented the print
statements as I would have done for the tage).

Ever tried to use MS VS.NET for debugging JS? Try it, and you'll
never want to use anything else. Even the obsolete 7.0 (.NET FW 1.0)
that can be had for next to nothing does the job (or in case you don't
care about Bill Gates' profit, just eMule it). Firefox script
debugger next to it is like Hyundai next to BMW.

And to see dynamically built object html, try entering into IE address
bar javascript:aler t(document.getE lementById('som e id').innerHTML) ;
Works with FF, too.

NNN

[sheldonlg]

no****@nowhere. net wrote:

And to see dynamically built object html, try entering into IE address
bar javascript:aler t(document.getE lementById('som e id').innerHTML) ;
Works with FF, too.

Thanks. That was [almost] great. The "almost" is because I can't cut
and paste it. If I could do the cut and paste, I could either (a)
format it nicely to see where I may have made a mistake or (b) put it
into a separate html file that I could then validate and have W3C do
that work for me. Is there a variant that would allow me to do that.

BTW, IE changes things slightly. It removes the quotes around things
like class="thisclas s" whereas FF doesn't. However, the formatting in
IE is somewhat better in starting new lines.

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

no****@nowhere. net wrote:

Ever tried to use MS VS.NET for debugging JS? Try it, and you'll
never want to use anything else.

I have tried it, and I prefer the MS Script Debugger for JScript, for its
not being evaluation software that cannot be registered, and its comparably
small memory footprint. Never wanting to use anything else would be
nonsense anyway because MS VS.NET can only debug JScript, not JavaScript or
other ECMAScript implementations .

[...]
And to see dynamically built object html, try entering into IE address
bar javascript:aler t(document.getE lementById('som e id').innerHTML) ;
Works with FF, too.

I prefer Firebug for debugging scripts in Firefox; you definitely should try
that.
PointedEars
--
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f8************ *******@news.de mon.co.uk>

[sheldonlg]

no****@nowhere. net wrote:

On Wed, 07 May 2008 00:28:44 GMT, "no****@nowhere .net"
<my***********@ hotmail.comwrot e:

>On Tue, 06 May 2008 07:54:25 -0400, sheldonlg <sheldonlgwrote :

>>no****@nowhere. net wrote:

And to see dynamically built object html, try entering into IE address
bar javascript:aler t(document.getE lementById('som e id').innerHTML) ;
Works with FF, too.
Thanks. That was [almost] great. The "almost" is because I can't cut
and paste it. If I could do the cut and paste, I could either (a)
format it nicely to see where I may have made a mistake or (b) put it
into a separate html file that I could then validate and have W3C do
that work for me. Is there a variant that would allow me to do that.

BTW, IE changes things slightly. It removes the quotes around things
like class="thisclas s" whereas FF doesn't. However, the formatting in
IE is somewhat better in starting new lines.

OK, here's a 'greater' implementation that answers your prayer - but
much more heavyweight. You enter into IE address bar
javascript:get It([some id], [optional true]);
The optional parameter doesn't work with FF due to outerHTML not being
a part of its object model, but setting it to false or just omitting
works.

NNN
<textarea id="src" rows="20" cols="150" style="display: none;"
comment="I am here for testing only. Delete me in
Production." ></textarea>
<script language="javas cript" type="text/javascript">
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
function getIt(id,outer)
{
//test function - displays ACTUAL HTML of the object corresponding
"id"
var ta=Get('src');
if(!ta)
{
alert('not available in this Release');
return;
}
var target=Get(id);
if(target)
{
ta.value=(outer ?target.outerHT ML:target.inner HTML);
ta.style.displa y='block';
}
else alert(id+' does not correspond to any object on the page');
}
</script>

Sorry, that was copy-paste from a place that uses stub function Get to
getElementById (just to type less - no other benefits). Replace Get
with getElementById to make the code above work - or just add this:

function Get(someId)
{return getElementById( someId);}

Thanks again. I am primarily a server side programmer (php) and Java,
c, etc. I have learned a lot of javascript over these past couple of
months, but I am still quite new to it. My question is that I have used
document.getEle mentById('src') . When is it allowable to leave off the
"document." prefix?