Re: Microsoft's JavaScript doc's newfangled problem

In comp.lang.perl.misc Xah Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If (1), then it would be a fucking incompetence of inordinate order. If Have you ever thought that your cross-postings are "incompetence of inordinate order"? Of course not since you are a troll. Axel -- http://mail.python.org/mailman

Re: Microsoft's JavaScript doc's newfangled problem

On the other hand, in terms of documentation quality, technologicalexcellence, responsibility in software, Microsoft in the 21st century is the holder of human progress when compared to the motherfucking OpenSourcers lying thru their teeth fuckheads. XahThis is not amusing anymore, somebody please

Re: Microsoft's JavaScript doc's newfangled problem

> What did you expect? There are two interpretations to this Microsoft's JavaScript doc problem: 1. They didn't do it intentionally. 2. They did it intentionally. If (1), then it would be a fucking incompetence of inordinate order. If (2), they would be assholes, even though they have the right

Re: Microsoft's JavaScript doc's newfangled problem

Zif wrote: > In a file called 'whidbey/script.js' they still use document.all > without any fall back to getElementById. Isn't whidbey the code name > for Visual Studio .NET 2005?  Does it use document.all exclusively? I'm wondering if they meant for that documentation to be read in VS 2005? --

Re: Microsoft's JavaScript doc's newfangled problem

Xah Lee wrote: > sometimes in the last few months, apparently Microsoft made changes to > their JavaScript documentation website: Their *JScript* documentation website - here's the keyword. See:

Microsoft's JavaScript doc's newfangled problem

sometimes in the last few months, apparently Microsoft made changes to their JavaScript documentation website: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/script56/html/1e9b3876-3d38-4fd8-8596-1bbfe2330aa9.asp so that, one has to goddamn press the "expand" button to view the