I have a static HTML page which is named via JavaScript as such: window.name = "windowname". This window opens a popup window, which contains links that target windowname.
This works as expected in IE/FF/Chrome and opens the links on the opener, however, Safari opens all links in a new window and not the opener.
Is anyone aware of a workaround or solution to this other than using JavaScript to open the links via opener.location.href? Is this a security feature of Safari or some other kind of issue?
Thanks in advance
Trying setting the "id" attribute to the same string as the name.
Not 100% sure what you problem is without being able to see your code but the following worked for me in Safari 4:
windowname:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<title>untitled</title>
</head>
<body onload="window.name='windowname'">
Open
</body>
</html>
popup:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<title>untitled</title>
</head>
<body>
test
</body>
</html>
No resolution for this was ever found, I had to go with a method that didn't use pop-up windows due to this.
thanks for the effort.
b
Related
I've added a WebView into my project. If I navigate to the html file that contains external javascript files they don't work. Bit if I write the javascript code hardcoded into the html file it works properly.
Here is the html portion:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<title></title>
<script type="text/javascript" src="testjs.js"></script>
</head>
<body>
<div id="abcd"></div>
<br/>
hello! this is a simple html block.
</body>
</html>
Here is the javascript portion:
document.getElementById("abcd").innerHTML = "New text!";
When I open the webview it shows
hello! this is a simple html block.,
but if the javascript code worked it would show
New Test!
hello! this is a simple html block.
Here is the folder structure:
src="testjs.js" is correct. The issue is not related to the path.
[Update 1]
Your code should work as we usually do for web development. But seems we need to make sure the html element used in the script has been initialized, so we have to put the to the end of the body element. Please try the following html code:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div id="abcd">a</div>
<br />
hello! this is a simple html block.
<script type="text/javascript" src="testjs.js"></script>
</body>
</html>
[Update 2]
Also check if you have changed the build action for testjs.js to content. go to Solution Explorer -> right click on testjs.js -> Properties -> change Build Action to Content. That will make sure the .js file will be deployed as part of you app.
WebView msdn page suggests that for security reasons you can not link to local content except for:
However, you can still link to HTML content in the app package using the ms-appx-web scheme, and to web content using the http and https URI schemes.
So you should be able to link to your script file using ms-appx-web:///testjs.js url.
Good afternoon StackOverflow, I have two almost identical pages:
Once deployed one of the Pages (Login.xhtml) loads everything correctly:
But the other page (Index.xhtml) doesn't import some of the CSS and JS:
I am confused as to why this would happen.
The elements themselves have identical formatting, this is one of the files being called (Login.xhtml)
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xmlns:h="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/html"
xmlns:ui="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/facelets"
xmlns:f="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/core"
xmlns:p="http://primefaces.org/ui"
xmlns:pt="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/passthrough" >
<body>
<ui:composition>
Login Content
</ui:composition>
</body>
</html>
And here's the other (content.xhtml)
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xmlns:h="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/html"
xmlns:ui="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/facelets"
xmlns:f="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/core"
xmlns:p="http://primefaces.org/ui"
xmlns:pt="http://xmlns.jcp.org/jsf/passthrough" >
<body>
<ui:composition>
content Content
</ui:composition>
</body>
</html>
Any clue as to why this is occurring? I just can't wrap my head around it, any and all help would be greatly appreciated.
Edit: Further information, both Index.xhtml and Login.xhtml (The composition files) are in the same folder.
The resource files Login.xhtml and content.xhtml are both in the same folder as well.
Can you add the links manually do your Login.xhtml? When this is working it may depens on the controller.
Edit: Sorry saw your post to late.
Did you try to check there in the same folder and they work well to include them manually in your Login.xhtml?
Are the paths correctly means are login and index are in the same folder?
Found a solution to my problem.
The problem of the missing Javascript and CSS libraries was due to the lack of Primefaces elements in the content.xhtml.
I fixed this by adding a Growl:
<p:growl id="growl" showDetail="true" sticky="true" />
That doesn't display, to the file common.xhtml. While I was properly importing Primefaces jQuery using the line:
<h:outputScript library="primefaces" name="jquery/jquery.js" target="head" />
Some of the scripts required other libraries that automatically import with Primefaces elements.
This may not be the elegant solution, but it became a solution that solves my issue nonetheless.
Good day, and thanks for your help.
I am trying to run following HTML in every browser: Opera, FF, IE, Chrome
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<script>
<![CDATA[
alert('Hey!');
]]>
</script>
</body>
</html>
None of them display the alert. Chrome logs an error in console: Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token <. It seems to be complaining about the fist < in CDATA declaration. Firefox also logs "syntax error"
The w3schools point out that this is the way to use CDATA http://www.w3schools.com/xml/xml_cdata.asp. Other answers on this site suggest it. What am I doing wrong? I tried playing with namespaces and doctypes, but that did not change anything.
Edit: I added XHTML name space and doctype, that I originally removed and the problem still persists.
The difference is between HTML and XHTML. W3Schools is correct that it’s a valid CDATA construct within XHTML, but as your question indicates that your code is HTML and there is no such thing as CDATA inside a <script> in HTML, your example fails as soon as the interpreter sees the "<". You can tell the browser that it’s looking at XHTML, but it's probably safer to handle HTML, too. To do that, you need to hide the CDATA inside JavaScript comments. (You might also consider identifying which language is inside your <script> block.)
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<script>
//<![CDATA[
alert('Hey!');
//]]>
</script>
</body>
</html>
This is, in fact, the method recommended by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) in XHTML Media Types, A.4. Embedded Style Sheets and Scripts.
The related question When is a CDATA section necessary within a script tag? explains that a CDATA section is recommended when embedding scripts in XHTML documents. However, just setting a XHTML doctype to the test document isn't enough. The CDATA is still being treated as a syntax error.
According to this blog post, that is because the content type needs to match the doctype definition. Proper XHTML needs to have the following Content-type header set:
Content-type: application/xhtml+xml
if that is not specified and text/html sent instead, browsers will revert to HTML. And indeed, if I add that header to my test case, browsers start properly parsing the JavaScript inside the CDATA even when the CDATA it's not commented out.
This works for me (setting the header using PHP):
<?php header("Content-type: application/xhtml+xml");
echo '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>'; ?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<script><![CDATA[alert('Hey!');]]></script>
</head>
<body>
</body>
</html>
You may see it as XML (XHTML) but that's not how the browser sees it.
You're serving it a text/html which means that the browser sees it as HTML.
It needs to be served with an XML mime type such as application/xhtml+xml
i.e. like this
http://www.alohci.net/application/xhtml+xml/starov.htm.ashx
and not like this
http://www.alohci.net/text/html/starov.htm.ashx
Check the view source to see that it's the same file. Check the "Net" tab in firebug (or the equivalent for your browser) to see the content type in the response headers.
Also, you need to comment out the CDATA so it won't throw a parsing error when it's run:
<script>
//<![CDATA[
alert('Hey!');
//]]>
</script>
1) Comment your CDATA
//<![CDATA[
alert('Hey!');
//]]>
2) add a script type
<script type="text/javascript">
I would like to use the code below but want it to happen to the current page when I click the link. Is this possible? Thanks in advance. :)
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<title>Open window to fullscreen without f11</title>
<script type="text/javascript">
function openWin(url){
var sw=screen.width;
var sh=screen.height;
newwin=window.open(url,'newwin','width='+sw+',height='+sh+',top=0,left=0,scrolling=0,toolbar=0,direc tories=0,menubar=0,location=0');
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
Coding Forums
</body>
</html>
Have you tried using window.location.href instead of window.open? window.open is used to open new browser window.
No it is NOT possible to open a url and CHANGE THE CHROME in the same window and you should not try either.
There is a horrific hack which opens a new window and closes the parent, but that is even worse.
There USED to be a fullscreen parameter but it was luckily removed. It is not up to the web "designer" to decide the size of the user's window nor to try and remove their history by closing the main window.
If you search for fullscreen here, you will get many, among this one:
How to make the window full screen with Javascript (stretching all over the screen)
I'd like to use Javascript to make IE6 download a file. It'll be created on the fly using Javascript. This file doesn't exist on a webserver. Here's a small example:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<script type="text/javascript">
function clicked() {
var xml = "<data>Just for testing</data>";
document.open("text/xml", "replace");
document.write(xml);
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<input type="button" value="Download" onclick="clicked();" />
</body>
</html>
Instead of loading the xml in the browser window, I want it to cause IE6 to prompt the user where to download the data to so that it can be saved without them having to use File -> Save as. Any ideas?
For IE6 you should be able to use document.execCommand() after your document.write():
document.execCommand('SaveAs',true,'file.xml');
This is not part of any standard and will only work in IE flavor browsers.
If your data must be generated client side, then you can post it back to the server so that it can be returned as a downloadable file.
No, this is not possible. A web-browser strictly doesn't allow this, as the ability to save files to disk through JavaScript only, would be very dangerous, even if the confirmation popup shows up.
EDIT: Thanks to other answers, I found out (not surprisingly) that this behavior is possible with some versione of IE.