Re: Proposed FormVariables hierarchy
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2000
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 31580
interpreted = N
texte = >A proposed new hierarchy might go something like this: > >HTML Form Context (all passed-in form variables, smart [CART], >insecure text vars) > Application Context (things like [VERSION] [DATE] [TIME] >[ELAPSEDTIME], default secure text vars) > Browser Context (things like [IPADDRESS] [REFERRER] [USERNAME] >[PASSWORD]) > template code (your own contexts nested however you decide) > [xxx] <- look for xxx here, and if not found, go up ^^^ > >By adding a second namespace for holding text variables (up in the >HTML Form Context), we can provide a place for storing insecure text >variables. The parser will find secure text variables first, then >form variables, then insecure textvariables. A side-effect would be >that one could have text variables with exactly the same name in both >namespaces, but secure ones would be found first. > >Default behavior would be to store text variables in the secure >namespace. Adding the optional secure=F parameter like [text >secure=f]fred=hello[/text] would put those values into the new >un-secure namespace. This may be the solution we've been hoping for ...One thing I notice here is that you never actually mention [math] variables. Since I do not want to make any assumptions, I will ask you directly: Will you add insecure math variables to the HTML Form Context group so math variables will have the same optional secure=f parameter and behavior as text variables?Another question, do you have (or will you be adding to the HTML docs) a list of all the variable names in the browser and application contexts?Also, how will this proposed solution change the previous hierarchy of interpreted [tag] values when a variable tag has the same name as a database field tags inside founditems contexts, or an order file field tag inside order file contexts? ================================ Kenneth Grome, WebDNA Consultant 808-737-6499 http://webdna.net ================================############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list
. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to Send administrative queries to
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
>A proposed new hierarchy might go something like this: > >HTML Form Context (all passed-in form variables, smart [cart], >insecure text vars) > Application Context (things like [version] [date] [time] >[elapsedtime], default secure text vars) > Browser Context (things like [ipaddress] [referrer] [username] >[password]) > template code (your own contexts nested however you decide) > [xxx] <- look for xxx here, and if not found, go up ^^^ > >By adding a second namespace for holding text variables (up in the >HTML Form Context), we can provide a place for storing insecure text >variables. The parser will find secure text variables first, then >form variables, then insecure textvariables. A side-effect would be >that one could have text variables with exactly the same name in both >namespaces, but secure ones would be found first. > >Default behavior would be to store text variables in the secure >namespace. Adding the optional secure=F parameter like [text >secure=f]fred=hello[/text] would put those values into the new >un-secure namespace. This may be the solution we've been hoping for ...One thing I notice here is that you never actually mention [math] variables. Since I do not want to make any assumptions, I will ask you directly: Will you add insecure math variables to the HTML Form Context group so math variables will have the same optional secure=f parameter and behavior as text variables?Another question, do you have (or will you be adding to the HTML docs) a list of all the variable names in the browser and application contexts?Also, how will this proposed solution change the previous hierarchy of interpreted [tag] values when a variable tag has the same name as a database field tags inside founditems contexts, or an order file field tag inside order file contexts? ================================ Kenneth Grome, WebDNA Consultant 808-737-6499 http://webdna.net ================================############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to Send administrative queries to
Kenneth Grome
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
ANSWER to: CC Merchant suggestions?? (1997)
WebCatalog f2 Installation (1997)
[SearchString] problem with [search] context (1997)
Reselecting popup menu (2002)
Combining search criteria (2000)
WebCat2b13MacPlugIn - [include] (1997)
[WebDNA] plupload ? (2012)
Help with (2003)
[WebDNA] [IF] comparing numeric values (2010)
WC2b15 File Corruption (1997)
setting username and password using a form. (2000)
RAM problems, [appendfile] problems (1998)
HELP WITH DATES (1997)
PIXO (1997)
TCP Connect (1999)
Credit Card Number checking (1997)
WebCat2 - [format thousands] (1997)
Code BabelFish (was: I've been thinking) (2002)
Error Log (2000)
WebDNA dying and trashing my databases (2005)