I understand. I have nothing that much against you Morning and I'll try to sound less abrasive in the future. Keep in mind I have been up till about 12:30am for about 4 nights straight on this so I am definitely trying all I could on customizing it and could not afford to just step back and say forget this plug-in because I had gotten much to far into it for our solution.
I am not one to just post and get freebies. Trust me, that's lame. On Jul 9, 2:42 pm, MorningZ <morni...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's been perfectly clear that whatever you are trying to accomplish > is anything *but* simple... and after two weeks of messing with it, > maybe it is/was time to cut your losses on trying to manipulate code > with which you have no idea what is going on under the hood..... > and code that someone wrote for free, supported for free, and has > since moved on...... the tablesorter plugin is the same way... it's > an older plugin that still works today, but people customizing it are > on their own... > > whatever... i've done my best to help and point out issues to this > point.... best of luck... looks like you'll need it > . > > On Jul 9, 3:33 pm, expresso <dschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Funny thing is, I'll be blogging about this carousel. And you may > > find my implementation to be pretty complex but you would not know > > about the entire implementation and you assume that what we are doing > > is "simple" > > > On Jul 9, 2:03 pm, expresso <dschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>making it difficult to understand what you are asking > > > > tell me how it's difficult, I am very thorough in explaining the > > > situation and things tried. > > > > On Jul 9, 1:57 pm, expresso <dschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > You've got it backwards.... it makes more sense and keeps the clutter > > > > out if you stay in the same topic..... > > > > > I did not say not to stay on the same topic. I said if I start > > > > veering off into anther discussion that's talking about a different > > > > approach (in this case in that previous thread I started with a > > > > question about obtaining the LAST <li>). Then I wondering maybe > > > > instead I can just iterate through the list of <li> and grab some by > > > > index. At that point, that's a whole different issue or scope. Yea, > > > > that time I should have stuck with the thread because I already > > > > committed to the question on the index. > > > > > Anyway I get it. But I should not be posting 2 different questions on > > > > the same thread which is what I try to avoid > > > > > On Jul 9, 1:54 pm, expresso <dschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > how the hell am I being rude? > > > > > > And second, I am giving information to help you help me. Again I try > > > > > all sorts of shit before I post stuff. I don't just post on every > > > > > step of the way. I am showing you what I have tried. So you either > > > > > get called out for not giving enough information or giving too > > > > > little. > > > > > > Chill > > > > > > On Jul 9, 11:04 am, MorningZ <morni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > "so it's only respectful on my part to > > > > > > start a new thread on a different topic that's veering off in the > > > > > > same > > > > > > thread. Not cool. " > > > > > > > You've got it backwards.... it makes more sense and keeps the > > > > > > clutter > > > > > > out if you stay in the same topic..... > > > > > > > As Liam points out.... you already asked the index question, AND it > > > > > > was answered by Charlie, in the topic you created just 13 hours ago > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/8832916... > > > > > > > and yet, here's an identical topic asking the identical question > > > > > > with > > > > > > 2 min apart two sentence ramblings on them all.... > > > > > > > Realize what this list for what it is: a mailing list where lots > > > > > > of > > > > > > us provide free help out of our own time.... > > > > > > > making it difficult to understand what you are asking, being rude to > > > > > > people trying to show you the way, rambling on and on with the same > > > > > > stuff.... all that doesn't lend itself very well to make your > > > > > > issues > > > > > > worth other peoples time and effort > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > On Jul 9, 11:12 am, expresso <dschin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Because sometimes I get into other topics not related to my > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > posts in those other thread so it's only respectful on my part to > > > > > > > start a new thread on a different topic that's veering off in the > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > thread. Not cool. > > > > > > > > On Jul 9, 9:30 am, Liam Potter <radioactiv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > how about reading all the replies to your other thread about > > > > > > > > this? > > > > > > > > > $("#mycarousel > li:eq(10)").css("margin-right", "5px"); > > > > > > > > > expresso wrote: > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to target certain <li> in an unordered list by > > > > > > > > > index > > > > > > > > > with jQuery? I thought maybe I could use .index but was not > > > > > > > > > able to > > > > > > > > > get the syntax right. > > > > > > > > > > I thought maybe something like this would work but is has not: > > > > > > > > > > $("#mycarousel > li").index(i).css("margin-right", "5px");
