<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Disappearing text in IE6 and &quot;dead&quot; JavaScript links</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaelshadle.com/2007/12/01/disappearing-text-in-ie6-and-dead-javascript-links/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaelshadle.com/2007/12/01/disappearing-text-in-ie6-and-dead-javascript-links/</link>
	<description>&#34;Sometimes I don&#039;t know why I even fucking try&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 21:05:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://michaelshadle.com/2007/12/01/disappearing-text-in-ie6-and-dead-javascript-links/comment-page-1/#comment-3668</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 06:02:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelshadle.com/2007/12/01/disappearing-text-in-ie6-and-dead-javascript-links/#comment-3668</guid>
		<description>In the past I swore void(0) makes other actions tied to that link not execute. I&#039;m too lazy to try it now :) But for some reason I have it in my head to not use void. Or maybe, it was void(), and void(0) is okay? Oh well.

I have not had any issues with &quot;javascript:;&quot; as of yet though. Perhaps the next time I need to write some code like that I will try void(0) - but I haven&#039;t coded any pseudo-dead links like that recently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the past I swore void(0) makes other actions tied to that link not execute. I'm too lazy to try it now <img src='http://michaelshadle.com/wordpress/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  But for some reason I have it in my head to not use void. Or maybe, it was void(), and void(0) is okay? Oh well.</p>
<p>I have not had any issues with "javascript:;" as of yet though. Perhaps the next time I need to write some code like that I will try void(0) - but I haven't coded any pseudo-dead links like that recently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sergi</title>
		<link>http://michaelshadle.com/2007/12/01/disappearing-text-in-ie6-and-dead-javascript-links/comment-page-1/#comment-3664</link>
		<dc:creator>Sergi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelshadle.com/2007/12/01/disappearing-text-in-ie6-and-dead-javascript-links/#comment-3664</guid>
		<description>I think the correct syntax for empty javascript links is javascript:void(0). I&#039;m unable to find the documentation right now, but it seems that in javascript syntax that&#039;s the way for a function returning null.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the correct syntax for empty javascript links is javascript:void(0). I'm unable to find the documentation right now, but it seems that in javascript syntax that's the way for a function returning null.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
