I know that when I deny the browser getting the location, it will call the error callback.
However, it doesn't seem to be the case for FF4.
Can anyone enlighten me as to how to control what my js does if the user clicks dun share.
Thanks =D
Is the user clicking "don't share for now" (which is equivalent to just not having made a decision yet, and hence doesn't make either the error or the success callback), or "never share" (which will give you an error callback last I checked)?
As for your JS... just do whatever you would do if the user completely ignores the geolocation notification, which the user is completely free to do.
Related
We need to display FB share dialog. It can be done with either FB.ui as:
FB.ui({
method: 'share',
display: 'iframe',
href: '{{postUrl}}'
});
or even using a link/REST.
I can add a second argument to FB.ui() as function(result){...}, and FB JavaScript SDK will invoke that as a callback after the dialog is closed [either with a share taking place, or without].
How could I detect that the dialog is displayed, not dismissed?
Thank you
You can only be sure if someone shared something if you authorize the user with the publish_actions permission. In that case, you will get the Post ID in the callback, as you can read in the docs: https://developers.facebook.com/docs/sharing/reference/share-dialog#response
Keep in mind that you are not allowed to reward users in any way for sharing, or incentivize sharing. You will not get publish_actions approved by Facebook just for checking if the user shared something.
Edit 1: If you just want to know if the dialog is visible...well, it is visible when you call FB.ui, and it is not visible anymore then the callback gets called.
Edit 2: I don´t see any use case for it (please do tell), but if you want to know if the dialog showed up (and did not get blocked by a popup blocker, for example), then i would say it is impossible to detect.
I've been searching for any reasonable example of a situation, when synchronous AJAX makes sense. I've found this SO question, where the author mentions window.onbeforeunload and claims, that "the request would never stop" if the AJAX call was asynchronous.
Can anybody explain this? I mean - window.onbeforeunload is fired when the user wants to close the tab. What had to be going on to make the tab still alive, even though somebody clicked to close it? Can somebody give more specific example?
He didn't say the request will never stop; he said it will never complete. That is, your code has no hope of ever getting the response back, because the execution environment (the window) would disappear from existence before that happened.
The tab will close when window.onbeforeunload exits with a truthy value. Thus, as long as it is running, the page is waiting for the return value, and not closing. This allows a synchronous AJAX to be sent, and for the response to be received and processed. If the request is asynchronous, the code constructs XHR object, then exits, and the page (and your code) goes away.
I have never tested this, but the answerer apparently believes (and I don't think it unreasonable) that the page might not stick around long enough for an async XHR to even be sent, let alone to receive a response. Thus, if you want to be sure the server receives the information that the user closed the page, you want to have the request synchronous.
What had to be going on to make the tab still alive, even though somebody clicked to close it? Can somebody give more specific example?
Sending a synchronous XMLHttpRequest on unload is the only way to guarantee delivery of session data when a user-agent unloads the page (and may never re-visit your site again). There are two specific cases for this:
Tracking - Tracking and reporting the total session time for a user's page visit.
Batching - Coalescing and deferring delivery of batched session data to reduce the number of server requests.
The Beacon spec (navigator.sendBeacon) was designed to optimize this specific case, making it possible to send asynchronous requests guaranteed to still complete even after the page unloads.
Is there a way to check from javascript if user already allowed geolocation in current page for once or forever? Maybe browsers stores somewhere we can read it from i don't know. Also is there any function that listens the allow or deny buttons instantly except the result of geolocation request? I have checked the docs but i couldn't find anything that helps.
Thank you.
No, there is no way to check if geolocation is allowed or not. The only thing you can do is ask for location and wait for either success or fail. (In Firefox you can't even detect the deny for now state, only for allow and deny for ever).
Look on code of this demo for more details on what can be done:
http://demo.chobits.ch/js/geolocation/
I'm trying to figure out what is going on here. I've been at it for hours now and can't seem to get a grip on why this is happening.
I'm making a few AJAX calls, and I keep getting this error back only in Firefox (version 21) on Mac OS X.
Here is the error:
"[Exception... "A parameter or an operation is not supported by the underlying object"
code: "15" nsresult: "0x8053000f (InvalidAccessError)" location:
"https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.0.0/jquery.min.js Line: 6"
I'm making a CORS call, so I set up my AJAX like so:
$.ajaxSetup({
crossDomain: true,
xhrFields: {
withCredentials: true
}
});
And continue calls henceforth. Basically, does anyone out there have ANY experience with this error? I see some posts online but they all seem to do with Cross-Domain CSS, which I'm not using.
Okay, so after of hours of testing (and great discussion from #Dave and #danronmoon, I've finally figured out what's going on.
The CORS (Cross-Domain Resource Sharing) calls I was making were set to 'async: false' -- (which I realize I did not include in my original post, as I thought it was inconsequential) this, seems to operate fine in all browsers except Firefox, where jQuery will bark at you and your ajax call will fail.
Thank you all for your help and I hope this helps someone else!
Since this is the first duckduckgo result for InvalidAccessError: A parameter or an operation is not supported by the underlying object I will add another source for this.
If you deal with such error when doing iframe/window actions, then you're probably prevented by the iframe's sandbox attribute (see https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/iframe-embed-object.html#attr-iframe-sandbox ) even when being on the same origin.
In my case, an iframe was trying to do a window.top.location.href = ... after a form submission success. The allow-top-navigation sandbox option is mandatory to do so.
Funny thing, this sandbox option is not mandatory to reload the top browsing context... it's only required for navigating in it.
For me, I was using WebSockets and called WebSocket.close(1001). It doesn't like my status code. Changing it to 1000 or not specifying a code (default 1005) works just fine.
this is the real solution by Diogo Cardoso, the xhr object or parent seems to lack a toString() method
CORS synchronous requests not working in firefox
Yes, it is a CORS problem caused by using ajax. But as user320550 asks, what if you NEED to use the property 'async:false'? I found that using the 'withCredentials:false' property as a workaround fixes the issue on firefox and doesn't affect other browsers.
Just want to add a somewhat nasty intermittent variant of Xenos's answer. As he mentioned, you can get this problem if you try and navigate the window by setting window.top.location.href = ... from within a sandboxed iframe, and that this can be prevented if your iframe has the allow-top-navigation option set.
But you might also find your iframe has the more restrictive allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation option. This will allow navigation, but only in response to a user action such as clicking a link or a button. For example, it will be allowed within a form submit event handler, but you can't just trigger it at an arbitrary point in time, such as from a setTimeout() callback with a long delay.
This can be problematic if you are (for example) using AJAX form submission before performing a redirect. The browser needs to decide if the navigation is in response to a user action or not. It does this by only allowing the navigation if it is considered to have happened within an acceptable time period of the user interaction. The HTML standard refers to this as transient activation.
The bottom line is that if your AJAX call is too slow, or if your user has a poor network connection, the navigation will fail. How slow is too slow? I have only tested Firefox, but it appears to allow 5 seconds before it considers the user interaction to have expired.
Possible solutions:
Ask whoever is responsible for the iframe options to upgrade to the blanket allow-top-navigation option
Don't perform async work such as AJAX requests in between user actions and top navigation. For example, use old-school POST form submission directly to the back-end, rather than using an AJAX request
Make sure your responses are as fast as possible. Catch any errors, and prompt the user to click something to trigger the navigation manually. For example:
async function submitForm() {
await doPotentiallySlowAsyncFormSubmit()
try {
window.top.location.href = ...
} catch (e) {
// Show message to user, e.g. "Form submitted, click here to go to the next step"
}
}
When using geolocation API's navigator.geolocation.getCurrentPosition() how to deal with a negative response?
It says that the second callback function is called when there is an error. However when user chooses not to reveal his location by cancelling the request that function is never fired.
It seems that getCurrentPosition() waits for an answer indefinitely. (at least in Firefox 4)
How can I know when user presses cancel (or no etc.)
Any ideas?
See edit below
You are correct, the error handler should fire when a user denies the location request. The error object passed into the error handler should contain an error code and message letting you know the user denied the request. However, I'm not seeing this in FF4 when selecting the option Not Now from the location request dialogue.
In Chrome, the API/callbacks work exactly as expected, but in Chrome there is no 3rd option.
EDIT
Ahhh okay I found a little quirk in the behavior of this in FF4. In normal mode (not private browsing), the user will be presented 3 options:
Always share
Never share
Not Now
Never share triggers the error handler correctly, but Not Now does not.
What does this mean and how to handle it?
Well, it looks like if the user hits Not Now, you aren't going to get a response. Therefore, I would set a timeout which checks a flag that would be set by one of the handlers. If this flag is not set (meaning the handlers didn't fire in the allotted time), you can do one of two things:
Assume that the user denied the request (even though the denial was temporary)
You can ask the user for permission again (via the same call) and the user will be presented with the dialog again.
Option 2 is probably bad usability (and annoying), so it is probably best to assume they denied temporarily and ask them again (politely!) the next time they visit the site.
I created a JsFiddle to play around with this API:
http://jsfiddle.net/7yYpn/11/
I don't think it's a bug, but an intentional choice when it comes to making it difficult to make websites that provides undesirable functionalities.. (as the top answer implied; IF you request again- when someone already said no- is rather annoying...)...
The difference between "not now".. and "never".. is that the programmer of the website KNOWS.. that if "not now" was triggered.. there would be an actual prompt to the user IF he sent the request again.. hence he would be able to "force" the user's hand to EITHER accept it.. or simply block data until the user agrees..
Decent and respectful programmers want to use such information to better provide a service (and to not wait for things that won't happen).. but truth is that there are enough spammers out there to overwhelm the end user..
(and there is no need to even TRY to send the request again, if it has been answered with "never".. because.. the user will not be terrorized in the same manner.. and if the site becomes sluggish and unresponsive, the user will just close it)
Ps. OH, and SERIOUS programmers might actually take a rejection as an actual.. rejection.. and store this choice somewhere.. despite the fact that "not now" is actually not intended as an ABSOLUTE rejection, but rather a "I have decided to not take any definite stand as of yet".. so.. someone who say "not now".. if the server knows of this choice and takes it as a "no".. then there might NEVER be another request sent.. despite the person WANTING to be able to reconsider at a later date)