Skip to main content
100%

Gist 155981

✓ Published0🌍 Public
XXXX
Last edited Jul 27, 2009
Created on Jul 27, 2009

The example compares expected and actual HTML output for a form-based user creation interface. It uses a raw HTML script tag with a JavaScript variable declaration (`int x_axis = 755`), though the syntax is not valid JavaScript. The visualization highlights a structural discrepancy: the expected output places the submit button inside a `<form>` with a POST action to `/users`, while the actual output moves the button outside the form and adds a stray text node containing "2". No external libraries or data sources are used; the comparison relies solely on static markup inspection.

AI-generated description

Similar vizzes

Loading thumbnail…

Gist 155908

This example shows a form-based user creation interface where the browser’s HTML parser rearranges the submitted markup. The code uses a Processing.js script inside a `script` tag to define a canvas variable, but the actual rendered page moves the submit button outside the form and inserts a literal `0` inside the form element. The discrepancy arises from how the browser handles unclosed form tags and embedded scripts, resulting in a different DOM structure than the expected source. The form action points to `/users`, but the visible output contains no functional form controls.

XXXX
81% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 155982

This visualization demonstrates a web form interface built with Haml markup that creates a user account through a submit action. The code uses the Haml templating engine, embedded Ruby (ERB) for partial inclusion, and a form helper API that binds to a `@user` object. A JavaScript logo partial defines an integer variable `x` with a value of 755, though the visual output of this variable is not shown in the provided code. The example relies on standard HTML form submission rather than a visualization library, with the layout structured through nested Haml indentation.

XXXX
74% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 155909

A Processing.js sketch embedded in a page renders a single line of code, `int x_axis = 755;`, but the browser’s HTML parser moves the submit button outside its intended form and inserts a stray `0` into the form’s action. The example highlights a mismatch between the expected Processing canvas container and the actual DOM structure after script execution. It uses the `application/processing` script type with a `data-canvas_name` attribute, while the form submission markup relies on standard HTML `form` and `input` elements, revealing how script placement can disrupt document layout.

XXXX
72% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 155911

The example demonstrates a user-creation form rendered with a dynamic Processing sketch embedded in the page header. The layout uses HAML with a Sinatra-style `form_for` helper, while the header includes a random selection between two Processing logo sketches via `partial "logos/logo_#{rand(2) + 3}"`. The Processing code initializes either an `x_axis` or `y_axis` variable, but no drawing or interaction is defined, so the sketch remains static and incomplete. The data source is the embedded Processing script, served through the Haml template’s partial mechanism.

XXXX
66% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 3742319

This example is a simple HTML form that displays a static text string, “ABC,” in a div, with a button labeled “TEST.” The page’s JavaScript defines a variable, `testvar`, with a value of `JIHIBNBUI`, and a `test()` function that assigns that variable to the div’s `innerHTML` property when the button is clicked. The code uses no external libraries or data sources, relying solely on plain JavaScript and the Document Object Model (DOM) to update the content. It demonstrates a basic event-handling interaction without any visualization or charting.

RRCura
65% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 3742279

This example builds a small HTML form to trigger an interactive test of Google's Visualization API, version 1. The code defines a data table (`gAxesTable`) with three fictional axes, each given an id, label, title, and type. When the user clicks the "TEST" button, the script populates the page’s `result` div with the table’s JSON representation via `google.visualization.DataTable` and its `toJSON()` method. The demonstration focuses on how to initialize the API and serialize structured data for display.

RRCura
63% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 159860

This example shows a browser-based test suite for a web application, rendering and validating the behavior of game interfaces for character management, chat, combat, inventory, and store features. The page runs JavaScript test specifications using JSpec, a testing framework, and includes jQuery and jQuery UI plugins for DOM manipulation and event handling. It also embeds HTML templates for dynamically displaying equipment, inventory items, and buffs. The code relies on custom application scripts, such as `application.js` and `character.js`, and uses `JSpec.include` to execute multiple test files sequentially, reporting results in the `#jspec` container. The data comes from the application’s live DOM elements and simulated XHR requests.

XXXX
60% match
Loading thumbnail…

Gist 3742278

This example demonstrates a minimal web-based test harness for the Google Visualization API. It defines a data table with three axes, each containing an identifier, display text, title, and type, and renders a simple form with a submit button. When the button is clicked, the `test()` function calls `init()`, then displays the table’s JSON representation in a `div` element via `innerHTML`. The code relies on `google.load("visualization", "1")` and the `google.visualization.DataTable` class to structure the data, though no actual chart or graphical output is generated.

RRCura
59% match