469,282 Members | 1,940 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,282 developers. It's quick & easy.

<img> onload vs complete

Hi everybody,

I'm using the event "onload" to trigger a function when an
image has been preloaded. But it seems to me that the
function is triggered right at the beginning of the transfer
from remote to local rather than at the end of it.

Can anybody confirm this?

Thank you.

Manu

Jul 31 '06 #1
4 3878
http://www.w3schools.com/jsref/jsref_onload.asp

has your information. Don't you love W3Schools ? :)

If you have troubles running your code, I suggest one of the following
:

1) verify if you have errors using alert debug windows and such (i.e. :
alert( var_to_test );)

2) use setTimeout() to delay the execution of the code

3) employ this to wrap your JS inside the <imgevent attribute :

<img src="blah.gif" onload="//<![CDATA[
/** some js code here **/
//]]>" />

Read about it here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDATA

But frankly, good coding rarely make it to solution 2) as it should run
correctly in solution 1).

Hope this helps.

Jul 31 '06 #2
Yanick wrote:
http://www.w3schools.com/jsref/jsref_onload.asp

has your information. Don't you love W3Schools ? :)
Yes; partial information and falsehoods put across as if it was
definitive.

<snip>
3) employ this to wrap your JS inside the <imgevent attribute :

<img src="blah.gif" onload="//<![CDATA[
/** some js code here **/
//]]>" />
When you have absolutely no idea why you are recommending something it
would probably be better not to mention it at all. This is a mystical
incantation, and can achieve nothing.
Read about it here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDATA
<snip>

A page that never suggests the above nonsense, or even implies anything
about it.

Richard.

Jul 31 '06 #3
Richard wrote:
Yanick wrote:
http://www.w3schools.com/jsref/jsref_onload.asp

has your information. Don't you love W3Schools ? :)

Yes; partial information and falsehoods put across as if it was
definitive.

<snip>
>3) employ this to wrap your JS inside the <imgevent attribute :

<img src="blah.gif" onload="//<![CDATA[
/** some js code here **/
//]]>" />

When you have absolutely no idea why you are recommending something it
would probably be better not to mention it at all. This is a mystical
incantation, and can achieve nothing.
Using CDATA is not a 'mystical incantation' when used as required by
the XML application to set aside parsing the CDATA content.
>
>Read about it here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDATA
<snip>

A page that never suggests the above nonsense, or even implies anything
about it.
Well. it does mention
'The term indicates that a certain portion of the document
is general character data, rather than non-character data or character
data with a more specific, limited structure.'
In some XML applications, the idea of 'general character data' is exploited
to hide an inline script from the operations that deal with figuring out the
rest of the XML user code.

For example:

....
<Script DEF='OpenVault'>
....
<![CDATA[ ecmascript:
function combinationEntered (value) {
unlocked = value;
}
function openVault(value) {
if (unlocked) vaultUnlocked = value;
}
]]>
</Script>

http://www.web3d.org/x3d/specificati...riptingExample

This is the special case of a Script node in a specific XML application that
also generally applies to inline script handling in XHTML tools.
>
Richard.
Fortunately, in that application, like others, there is a way to get rid of
the
CDATA or equivalent wrapper. Instead, just include the url to the script
location.

Thanks and Best Regards,
Joe
Jul 31 '06 #4
Joe D Williams wrote:
>Richard Cornford wrote:
>>Yanick wrote:
<snip>
>>3) employ this to wrap your JS inside the <imgevent attribute :

<img src="blah.gif" onload="//<![CDATA[
/** some js code here **/
//]]>" />

When you have absolutely no idea why you are recommending
something it would probably be better not to mention it at
all. This is a mystical incantation, and can achieve nothing.

Using CDATA is not a 'mystical incantation' when used as required
by the XML application to set aside parsing the CDATA content.
<snip>

Which is irrelevant to placing CDATA style mark-up inside the value of
an intrinsic event attribute in either HTML or XHTML. In neither case
could that CDATA style mark-up ever be interpreted as declaring CDATA,
and the result only avoids being a syntax error by being the text of
comments. Given that, the above most certainly is a mystical
incantation; it does precisely nothing in reality and is only being
'used' (rather than being weeded out as an obvious error) because it
does precisely nothing in reality.

Richard.
Jul 31 '06 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

15 posts views Thread by Philipp Lenssen | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by MyndPhlyp | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Carl | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by bgold12 | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Sven Reuter | last post: by
reply views Thread by zhoujie | last post: by
reply views Thread by suresh191 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.