常见问题建议3.1弗拉纳根的书籍 [英] FAQ suggestion 3.1 Flanagan's books
问题描述
对于3.1节，值得注意的是第四版
Flanagan'的JavaScript已经绝版，但是第五版版本可用。
http://jibbering.com/faq / #FAQ3_1
我认为还值得包括直接链接到每本书的勘误表
以及强调其重要性的评论检查
勘误表。
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript4/errata/
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript5/errata/
我已经提交了一些勘误表向弗拉纳根报告第五版
，他非常感激。我认为，即使是简单鼓励在常见问题解答中发送勘误报告也是好的。毕竟，许多
读者（像我一样）被勘误混淆在c.l.j上提出问题。
也许是关于为什么有些c.l.j的简短评论。常客们犹豫不决
推荐Flanagan'的书，但为什么他们仍然推荐它。
我很高兴我有第四和第五版本自
在制作第五个时删除了一些重要信息。它让我觉得我也应该得到第一版，第二版和第三版。
彼得
Hi,
For section 3.1 it might be worth noting that the fourth edition of
Flanagan''s JavaScript is out of print but a fifth edition is available.
http://jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ3_1
I think it would also be worth including link directly to the errata
for each book and a comment emphasizing the importance of checking the
errata.
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript4/errata/
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript5/errata/
I have submitted some errata reports to Flanagan for the fifth edition
and he has been very appreciative. I think it would be good to even
briefly encourage sending errata reports in the FAQ. After all, many
readers (like me) confused by errata ask questions on c.l.j.
Perhaps a brief comment about why some c.l.j. regulars are hesitant in
recommending Flanagan''s book but why they still do recommend it.
I am very happy that I have both the fourth and fifth editions since
some important information was removed when making the fifth. It makes
me think I should get the first, second and third editions too.
Peter
推荐答案
Peter Michaux写道：
Peter Michaux wrote:
对于3.1节，可能值得注意的是第四个
版的Flanagan'的JavaScript已经绝版，但是第五版可以获得第二版。
http://jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ3_1
我的想法是第5版应该是
以及附注说明虽然第5版是
大大扩展了不良建议和不合标准的比例
代码在第4版和第5版之间没有增加（这是我从我有时间阅读第5版的印象中获得的
）。
这可能会持续到某种程度ars有时间实际（阅读和）
支持这本书（我不会这样做，就像我不同的那样
赞同第4版的人）。
< snip>
My thoughts were that the availability of the 5th edition should be
stated along with a note saying that although the 5th edition is
considerably expanded the proportion of poor advice and sub-standard
code has not increased between the 4th edition and the 5th (which is the
impression I have from what I have had time to read of the 5th edition).
That could stand until some regulars have time to actually (read and)
endorse the book (which I would not do, in the same way as I was not
among those who endorsed the 4th edition).
<snip>
也许是关于为什么有些c.l.j的简短评论。常客是
在推荐Flanagan的书时犹豫不决，但为什么他们仍然会推荐它。
Perhaps a brief comment about why some c.l.j. regulars are
hesitant in recommending Flanagan''s book but why they still
do recommend it.
< snip>
实际推荐多少人？一般来说，它所说的最多
远远优于任何其他可用书籍。那不是
必然是一个推荐，更多的是对javascript书籍的一般质量的谴责。
Richard。
<snip>
How many actually do recommend it? Generally the most that is said of it
is that is far superior to any other book available. That is not
necessarily a recommendation , more a condemnation of the general
quality of javascript books.
Richard.
Peter Michaux在11/26/2006凌晨3:25发表以下内容：
Peter Michaux said the following on 11/26/2006 3:25 AM:
对于3.1节，值得注意的是第四版
Flanagan'的JavaScript已经绝版，但第五版已经发布。
http://jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ3_1
该条目在修订后的xml文件中已更改为
第五版。
.xml文件位于 http://jibbering.com/faq/newfaq/ index.xml 但是从它创建的
index.html文件还没有创建。
That entry, in the revised xml file to date, has been changed to the
Fifth Edition.
The .xml file is at http://jibbering.com/faq/newfaq/index.xml but the
index.html file that is created from it hasn''t been created yet.
我认为还值得包括直接链接到每本书的勘误表
以及强调查看
勘误的重要性的评论。
http://www.oreilly.com / catalog / jscript4 / errata /
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript5/errata/
第五版的勘误现已添加。
Errata for the Fifth Edition is now added.
我已经向Flanagan提交了第五版
的勘误报告，他非常感激。我认为，即使是简单鼓励在常见问题解答中发送勘误报告也是好的。毕竟，很多
读者（像我一样）被勘误混淆在c.l.j上提出问题。
I have submitted some errata reports to Flanagan for the fifth edition
and he has been very appreciative. I think it would be good to even
briefly encourage sending errata reports in the FAQ. After all, many
readers (like me) confused by errata ask questions on c.l.j.
我不认为在clj常见问题解答中提供技术支持，甚至认可它是
。虽然，如果达成共识就是添加它，我将b $ b添加它吧。
-
Randy
机会有利于准备好的心灵
comp.lang.javascript常见问题 - http://jibbering.com/faq
Javascript最佳实践 - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
I don''t think doing technical support, or even endorsing it, is
appropriate in the clj FAQ. Although, if the consensus is to add it, I
will add it :)
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
Randy Webb写道：
Randy Webb wrote:
.xml文件位于 http：// jibbering。 com / faq / newfaq / index.xml
目前格式不正确的XML：
XML解析错误：不匹配的标签。预期：< / NEWSGROUP>。
地点： http://jibbering.com/faq/newfaq/index.xml
行号64，第8列：< / P>
--- ---- ^
问题是
< NEWSGROUP> comp.lang.javascript< NEWSGROUP>
应该是
< NEWSGROUP> comp.lang.javascript< / NEWSGROUP>
我想。
-
Martin Honnen
http：//JavaScript.FAQTs。 com /
这篇关于常见问题建议3.1弗拉纳根的书籍的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
