Re[4]: Problem with new formvariables
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2000
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 31233
interpreted = N
texte = >That is exactly why the is a better idea ... Grant, I disagree with John Peacock's suggestion to change the tag in order to define which variable hierarchy we get to use. Here are three reasons why I don't like this suggestion:1- It ignores the issue of sites that do not require this tag. Some of us actually like the current and long-standing option of NOT being forced to use this tag in every page we create. I see no reason for eliminating this global preference now, simply to deal with the far more specific variable hierarchy issue.2- If you do what John suggests, you'll end up tying this tag to any other changes you might come up with for version 4. Why try to control how we use variables by changing this unrelated tag? If the problem is with variables, it should be dealt with it in the variable tags themselves, not in a global tag that has a completely different purpose.And here's the most important reason of all:3- If you follow John's suggestion we will NOT end up with a new level of variables to work with! Instead we will simply be forced into an 'either-or' situation. That's just plain foolish when you clearly have the ability to create a whole new level of variables for us to use *in addition* to the ones we already have.I see it this way:If you make a point of *adding* another kind of variable -- instead of making us choose one or the other -- you will be giving us new flexibility and new options, instead of essentially telling us You can have one or the other but not both.With an additional new level of variables to work with, you're sure to see us using this enhancement in ways you cannot possibly imagine now. After all, you never anticipated the coding techniques we would develop with the 3.0 variable hierarchy, and look how much we love it! :)The 3.0 variable hierarchy is an exceptional tool, please don't make us choose between it and your secure 4.0 hierarchy -- when we can make very good use of both at the same time.Thanks ... :) ================================ 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:
>That is exactly why the is a better idea ... Grant, I disagree with John Peacock's suggestion to change the tag in order to define which variable hierarchy we get to use. Here are three reasons why I don't like this suggestion:1- It ignores the issue of sites that do not require this tag. Some of us actually like the current and long-standing option of NOT being forced to use this tag in every page we create. I see no reason for eliminating this global preference now, simply to deal with the far more specific variable hierarchy issue.2- If you do what John suggests, you'll end up tying this tag to any other changes you might come up with for version 4. Why try to control how we use variables by changing this unrelated tag? If the problem is with variables, it should be dealt with it in the variable tags themselves, not in a global tag that has a completely different purpose.And here's the most important reason of all:3- If you follow John's suggestion we will NOT end up with a new level of variables to work with! Instead we will simply be forced into an 'either-or' situation. That's just plain foolish when you clearly have the ability to create a whole new level of variables for us to use *in addition* to the ones we already have.I see it this way:If you make a point of *adding* another kind of variable -- instead of making us choose one or the other -- you will be giving us new flexibility and new options, instead of essentially telling us You can have one or the other but not both.With an additional new level of variables to work with, you're sure to see us using this enhancement in ways you cannot possibly imagine now. After all, you never anticipated the coding techniques we would develop with the 3.0 variable hierarchy, and look how much we love it! :)The 3.0 variable hierarchy is an exceptional tool, please don't make us choose between it and your secure 4.0 hierarchy -- when we can make very good use of both at the same time.Thanks ... :) ================================ 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:
pc (1997)
re: Large Database Options? (1999)
autocommit problem (1998)
Firewalls - What's Good? (1999)
emailer w/F2 (1997)
Webcat+Webstar+Firesite - Encrypted Templates ? (2001)
Multiple catalog databases and showcart (1997)
DON'T use old cart file! (1997)
Emailer errors & disappearing messages (1998)
Help Encrypt/Decrypt eMail (2003)
The Guru Speaks-Is That Really the Only Manuel? (1998)
ShowCart Errors (2000)
New command suggestion (1997)
Sorting by SKU Not Working (1998)
decrypt and summ problems (1999)
Security Levels... Possible? (2000)
Webcat & SIMS (1998)
FIXED: Showing Results Alphabetically in Columns (top to (2002)
flash-wc (2000)
test (2004)