<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://weblogs.asp.net/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx</link><description>I have immense respect for Douglas Crockford, but that doesn't mean I can't disagree with him... Douglas has written on a number of occasions that he prefers plain script tags, with no attributes. The argument goes like this: "This script block uses the</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2007 SP1 (Build: 20510.895)</generator><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#5342340</link><pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:18:27 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:5342340</guid><dc:creator>Bertrand Le Roy</dc:creator><author>Bertrand Le Roy</author><description>&lt;p&gt;Mike: unfortunately there isn't much for JS version mangement. Prettt much everyone is targetting EcmaScript 3 at this point (which all modern browsers implement), but there's still a debate going on on how this is going to work in the future. This is going to have to be solved before the next version of EcmaScript is out, whatever that is.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Currently, There are differences between browsers (bugs and additional features). For bugs, people just work around them, sometimes with ugly browser detection code, and for additional features, people either don't use them or use capability detection (checking if a method exists before using it).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But differences between implementations of the EcmaScript are nothing when compared with the nightmare that is DOM quirks anyway.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5342340" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#5338099</link><pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:09:08 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:5338099</guid><dc:creator>mike</dc:creator><author>mike</author><description>&lt;p&gt;But what about the JavaScript version number?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Isn&amp;#39;t there contradictory syntax between JS 1.0 and 1.2 for example -- equality operators? strict typing? -- and it&amp;#39;s the version number in the script tag is the only way to switch between the modes?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Is JavaScript syntax now frozen in 1996 -- you can only use JS v.1.0? Or do modern browsers inherently use a later JS version -- so your current code will break in older browsers?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5338099" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#4010741</link><pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:33:57 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:4010741</guid><dc:creator>Bertrand Le Roy</dc:creator><author>Bertrand Le Roy</author><description>&lt;p&gt;PKINTAL: this is off-topic. Please send me mail through the contact form of this blog and I'll give you an answer offline.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=4010741" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#4003267</link><pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:50:48 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:4003267</guid><dc:creator>PKINTAL</dc:creator><author>PKINTAL</author><description>&lt;p&gt;How to create aspx pages Dynamically?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=4003267" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#3968909</link><pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:47:23 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:3968909</guid><dc:creator>Bertrand Le Roy</dc:creator><author>Bertrand Le Roy</author><description>&lt;p&gt;Shanmuganathan: you're terribly off-topic ;)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Please send me mail using the contact form on this blog and I'll give you an answer offline.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3968909" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#3964098</link><pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:35:11 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:3964098</guid><dc:creator>Shanmuganathan</dc:creator><author>Shanmuganathan</author><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;I hav a situation that i need to open a file in specific program... For example i have a Text file(Notepad) and Onclicking,it must get opened in Notepad... How do i do that in ASP.Net using C#..&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;and also i need to download multiple file in ASP.Net... If u have any articles or codes regarding this send to me...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Im expecting ur reply...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Regards,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Shanmuganathan&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3964098" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#3955106</link><pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:36:43 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:3955106</guid><dc:creator>Bertrand Le Roy</dc:creator><author>Bertrand Le Roy</author><description>&lt;p&gt;Douglas: all that's true, but not everyone may have the luxury of ignoring XHTML. Many administrations have this as a requirement. Also, even if some browsers *cough* IE *cough* don't support XHTML, it's still very useful in situations where you need the markup to be a dialect of XML for whatever reason.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For me, violating RFC 4329 is by far the least of those three evils: (almost) no one can afford to fail on IE, many people can't afford to ignore XHTML and there is no big disadvantage in violating RFC 4329.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Just trying to present people with the options and what they imply.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the comment!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3955106" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#3953589</link><pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:29:25 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:3953589</guid><dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator><author>Scott</author><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;in the future browsers won&amp;#39;t support other scripting languages&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On one hand, I understand why we want to think about what future browsers will/won&amp;#39;t support. A lack of that kind of thinking got us, the web developer community, into a mess 5-7 years ago.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But there&amp;#39;s lot of things, plugins and what not, that browsers might not support in the future. Should we ignore all of those things now? No.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The biggest problem I had with Crockfords statement is that he didn&amp;#39;t present any negative effects of using the &amp;quot;type&amp;quot; attribute. He didn&amp;#39;t have an example of something breaking or not working because the tag had a &amp;quot;type&amp;quot; declared. I don&amp;#39;t see any reason to not use the type attribute.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3953589" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#3952999</link><pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:01:15 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:3952999</guid><dc:creator>Douglas Crockford</dc:creator><author>Douglas Crockford</author><description>&lt;p&gt;You can violate RFC 4329 or you can violate XHTML 1.0 or you can fail on some browsers. You must choose one. I find it is best to ignore XHTML because it isn&amp;#39;t going to happen anyway. We are stuck with HTML.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3952999" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Should I use a type attribute on script tags?</title><link>http://weblogs.asp.net/bleroy/archive/2007/09/17/should-i-use-a-type-attribute-on-script-tags.aspx#3947906</link><pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 16:49:33 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">c06e2b9d-981a-45b4-a55f-ab0d8bbfdc1c:3947906</guid><dc:creator>Bertrand Le Roy</dc:creator><author>Bertrand Le Roy</author><description>&lt;p&gt;Brett, you're right, I'm an idiot and I've updated the post.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://weblogs.asp.net/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3947906" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>