>If that's correct, it took me only 5 minutes to find that info and
>aother 5 to copy&paste the relevant tidbits into this message. Why
>couldn't you find that info yourself, instead of pretending that
>you had no way to learn that except by asking me?
It was true at the time. I've gone past some of that where i can see that
some specific windows language ystems exist for this. I have located a
couple of CGI specific tutorial books, as well.
At one point you asked ifusing an ActiveX control was useful for some
specific goal.. I just read in a brochure which came with Visual
Developer
Suite, they are offering ActiveX controls for dynamic spreadsheets, charts
and business graphics, text editing, and spell checking. These components
are named Formula One, First Impression, VisualWriter, and VisualSpeller.
As I see the issue of using HTTP, what they do is send that HTTP heading
information to the browser, but some indexing search engine is actually a
third party in some cases of context indexing.
The subject of my posted intranet, is 10 flower shops using date
integration, and listserv to compile and share data. A similar and
updated
design with additional topics is the main topic for instruction in the new
book ASP.NET 2.0 Website Programming - Problem Design Solution May 2006.
He
uses a Beerhouse and adds member****p, opinion polling, news and article
manager, opinion poll, newsletters, forums, e-commerce store,
personalization and Web parts, localizing the site, deploying the site ...
as instruction topics.
Im using a RAD Developer tool like that Visual Developer Suite. Im going
to
use components for data standardization i.e., record templates (write 100
indexed records starting with indexs 15001, to 15100, and use standard
boxes
or something for fields and string data.
I was surprised to find out that I learned what the ActiveX compoents
would
be useful for. I hardly ever find anythiing useful except on a company or
university website. I bet your always checking to see whose celebrity
birthday it is .. I wouldn't make it in your world
"Robert Maas, see http://tinyurl.com/uh3t"
<rem642b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message news:rem-2008jan07-006@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> REM> I don't quite understand why you need to do anything like that.
> REM> To set up a CGI program, you either have the application directly
> REM> as a script in the CGI file (typical way to do it in sh or perl),
> REM> or the application directly machine-executable (C, C++), or you set
> REM> up a sh script which launches the actual application (lisp, java).
> REM> Auto-loading of modules in lisp or java is part of the mechanism of
> REM> the language itself, having nothing to do with CGI. You just need
> REM> to make sure the classpath is correct in java, and that you have
> REM> autoload stubs in lisp.
> > From: "WALLYWORLD" <ran...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > How can I do anything you mention with Windows...?
>
> I can't answer that specifically, because I've never had access to
> any MicroSoft Windows system which is CGI-accessible from the
> network. Presumably there's something like a public_html directory
> with a cgi_bin sub-directory, although the names may be different
> on MS-Windows compared to Unix/Linux.
>
> Google search for: cgi windows xp
> <http://www.cgi101.com/learn/connect/winxp.html#8>
> #!/perl/bin/perl -wT
> print "Content-type: text/html\n\n";
> print "<h2>Hello, World!</h2>\n";
> ... put "first.cgi" as the file name. Save it in your My Website
folder,
....
>
> Since I have no access to any MS-Windows system here, I have no way
> to verify it works. Would you please give it a try?
>
> If that's correct, it took me only 5 minutes to find that info and
> aother 5 to copy&paste the relevant tidbits into this message. Why
> couldn't you find that info yourself, instead of pretending that
> you had no way to learn that except by asking me?
>
> If that's not correct, if My Website isn't the right place to put
> CGI scripts, then maybe somebody with experience with CGI on
> MS-Windows can provide a correction now that I've given a good
> guess?
>
> > Further down in this page, "The Web browser serves as the
> > Universal client and must be able to access and display data from
> > virtually anywhere. Unix-based and NT systems have an edge as a
> > data source, because they sup****t intranet standards.
>
> Yeah, so what?
>
> > However mainframes and midrange computers are not as fortunate.
> > Not only do you have to convert working networking protocols, you
> > must also concern yourself with different text standards (ASCII and
> > EBSDIC)
>
> Don't you even know how to spell "EBCDIC" (Extended
> BinaryCodedDecimal Interchange Code)? When you copy text from some
> other source, don't you even notice when a key term is misspelled?
>
> AFAIK, except for some IBM mainframes, virtually all the mainframes
> and midrange computers used ASCII.
>
> > and the nuances of terminal based communication.
>
> The DEC PDP-10 (and earlier PDP-6) did terminal based communication
> just fine. The only IBM mainframe system that I recall had trouble
> with decent terminal based communication was Wylbur, which was
> based on an explicit half-duplex protocol with the keyboard
> **locked** whenever it was not the terminal's turn to talk. It was
> actually painful to try to type when the keys on the IBM Selectric
> terminal were physically **locked** and refused to budge when the
> fingers tried to move, causing servely stubbed fingers that made
> them sore for many minutes afterward.
>
> Except for that one rather obsolete example (is Wylbur even
> installed anywhere nowadays?), can you cite any mainframe that
> couldn't do decent terminal/modem I/O?
>
> > One way of handling this problem is straight forward: You convert
> > terminal based forms into Web pages, creating CGI fields mimicking
> > the source screen.
>
> I'm missing the connection here. What does difficulty of some
> operating system doing user-friendly terminal I/O have to do with
> the problem of applictions designed for local IBM 2250 screens
> being converted to use Web forms instead? (I might have the IBM
> product number wrong. It might be 2235 or somesuch.)
>
> Any decent software application is written in such a way that
> specific parts of the software deal with setting up forms on the
> screen and accepting user interactions from it. If these parts
> aren't neatly modularized, then the program needs to be refactored
> to provide cleanly separate modules for user-interface vs. data
> model and business logic. Once this is done properly, it's possible
> to generate alternate user interfaces for each of:
> - Web forms
> - stdio command loop
> - GUI (awt, swing, clim, turtle-graphics, HyperCard, VB, etc.)
> - text screens (VT100, IBM2250, TheComputerForPeopleWhoLoveMoney)
> such that exactly the same data model and business logic would work
> in any of those modes.
>
> > This process is often called wrapping (or screen wrapping),
> > because you are simply adding a translation layer between the
> > terminal based application and the Web-based application.
>
> Somehow I don't think that's a good idea, trying to emulate one UI
> using another existing UI, by guessing the intentions of the base
> UI. Better to abstract out what is *really* wanted at an abstracte
> level, and implement the various UIs in parallel. It takes more
> work to refactor the UI to modularize it out, but I think that's
> really necessary to make the application work at all.
>
> One essential difference between the various kinds of UI is that
> Web forms are tied to an explicit full-form transaction whereas
> other modes allow more incremental operations. There's just no way
> an application that already assumes incremental screen operations
> can be used in a Web-form environment simply by adding an extra
> layer between the Web and the old application.
>
> One thing that seriously doesn't work in Web forms is
> drag-and-drop. But multi-selection of objects followed by selecting
> what to do with the group seems to me an entirely satisfactory
> work-around that is compatible with Web forms. (In fact
> drag-and-drop is rather user unfriendy at times where your finger
> slips off the mouse button at the wrong time and suddenly your
> group of ten icons are dropped into some wrong place, such as into
> a folder you are accidently over. Sometimes I wish I could select a
> group of icons, and select the target, separately, and *then*
> confirm that's where I really want then to go, instead of they *go*
> already the moment I accidently lift my finger off the mouse
> button. Same with pull-down menus. The pre-2004 Yahoo! Mail
> interface has me select checkboxes of messages I want to move, and
> pull down a menu to select which folder to move them into, and then
> I have a chance to visually check if I got the right destination
> before I click the MOVE button. The 2004-current interface uses
> JavaScript to **immediately** move the messages the moment my
> finger lifts from mouse button while pulling down the desination
> menu, which is a royal danger which has bitten me several times.)
>
> > Although I only have use UNIX in a programming mode, with a C
> > compiler, the UNIX systems have do***entation that is worse than
> > even Windows systems.
>
> I'm not aware that MS-Windows has *any* decent do***entation to
> begin with. But in either case, you need to know the name of the
> application before you can ask how to use it. If you have a task in
> mind, but don't know which application might do it, it can be very
> difficult to find any useful help. For example, on the Macintosh if
> you want to collect the entire screen view as an image file (which
> you can then im****t into MacPaint or into HyperCard or install as
> your desktop background), you just press a clover-number
> combination which is well do***ented in the printed do***entation.
> But on Windows, the same task is not do***ented anywhere I could
> find, and the person in charge of our semi-public computer center
> had not the slightest idea how to do it. Finally at Grace Community
> Center in San Jose I by chance found somebody who knew the crucial
> first step and had an idea for the second step and by experimenting
> I finally found a series of steps using one keystroke plus three
> separate application programs that could finally create a picture
> file of what the screen looked like.
>
> (I've never had GUI access to a Unix system, so the question never
> came up on such. I haven't investigated how to do such a task on
> my RedHat Linux laptop.)
>
> > It seems to me that it gets worse until you to give up on Unix
altogether,
>
> That doesn't parse. Is there a word missing? Or an extra misplaced word?
>
> > It would most likely be impossible to achieve a UNIX server which
> > is secure, and write even a mickey mouse application to run on
> > it, without employing a dozen people for at least 5 years.
>
> But secure Unix servers already exist, so why re-invent the wheel??
>
> > I doubt if I know how to create terminal based forms into Web pages.
>
> That isn't English. Is this what you meant to say?
> < I don't know how to converte terminal based forms into Web pages.
>
> So what exactly do you mean by "terminal based forms"?
>
> Do you mean command loops where you have a prompt asking for some
> command of some particular type, with brief list of valid commands
> available, and you type ? for a verbose list of commands?
> Command (F, U, P) ?
> F = Browse for a file
> U = Type a URL
> P = Start a program
> Command (F, U, P) F
> Name of file: tmp*.txt
> Select one of these files:
> 1 = tmp1.txt
> 2 = tmpfoo.txt
> 3 = tmpbar.txt
> Q = quit back to main command
> Select: 2
> Selected tmpfoo.txt, what to do with it (D, R, V) ?
> D = delete
> R = rename
> V = view in text editor
> Selected tmpfoo.txt, what to do with it (D, R, V) R
> Rename tmpfoo.txt to: newJob.txt
> Successful rename.
> Command (F, U, P)
>
> Or do you mean some sort of full-screen-text-mode form, using VT100
> or other termcap (used by lynx, emacs, vi, pine, etc.), or IBM2250
> (used by various VM/CMS utilities such as dir, mail, etc.), etc.?
>
> > The article I was citing - Web Publi****ng Unleashed (i think)
> > suggested that converting Windows Word do***ents into Web pages was
> > elementary work.
>
> Well, you open the File menu, select Save As ..., at the bottom of
> the dialog where it says type of file to save you change it to Web
> Page, then click the OK button, and it creates a main HTML file
> plus a sub-directory containing all the images and other non-text
> components. Didn't you know that? Or are you talking about
> something else?
>
> (Snipped the rest of your ramblings...)
|
