Re: Browser Back button

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2003


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 47481
interpreted = N
texte = Glenn, First, your comments had NO helpful information. I believe you had no motive to reply other than to irritate more an already irritated person. If you like provoking people, use another resource please.Glenn Busbin wrote:>>Hello, I have discovered that the IE for OSX (5.2) >>does some different things. 1) It has trouble with JavaScript >>and >> >> > >Never reply on client-side apps for server-side operations. Too many different platforms, too different many browsers, and too many different users. This is the world wide web, not a closed, controlled intranet inside a company. > I don't rely on client-side apps per say, I rely on the majority concensus of the functionality of browsers and W3C. We all have to rely on broswers and standards! If we didn't, we would not know what to code for.I went straight to W3C after posting to the list. I found comments that have never been fully addressed on this list about post and get. These methods have came up in conversation many times here and the feedback I remember is that get is an URL and Post is not. There has been no advice to which one is better. Contrary to this, there is an effort at W3C to make a difference. This effort might have contributed to the decision of the Mac department at Microsoft to not keep variables cached. At W3C it is remarked (in my abridged interpretation) that Post generally should only be used when it is meant as undoable. It also makes note of that the info should not be cached when certain MIME headers (EXPIRES etc.) say that the page is, well, expired. So, maybe there is validity for the is Mac department at Microsoft. It is a fact though that most browsers can recapture values from forms with the back button (and sometimes reload button. The answer to getting this particular browser to work, looks to be using Get instead of post> > >>2) (perhaps most interesting to this list) The browsers back button >>doesn't reload any of the form variables!) >> >> > >It isn't supposed to. > uh, thanks for the insightful information and solution. Its a lil more complicated than that.>>Do I know need to impliment a cookie system just for this one browser? >> >> >> > >No. You need to implement a better navigation system for the site and a better server-side way of tracking carts regardless of browser or platform. That may or may not involve cookies. > that may or may not be a lack of help. Fact is, that on this site, Navigation is very well initiated. However, I don't have control (unless I impliment javascript that gets rid of the tools in the browser) if a user decides to hit his/her back button. I think my navigation is great thanks. Glenn, I would think this issue would be interesting to the list as many people use post instead of get. Your snide comments just show you are an angry person offering no help. My concluding thought is that Microsoft may have have reasons to do this (deriving from the W3C) So I guess I can't complain. However, it is still a frustrating thing that the concessus of actual browser products is to retain those post values (even if one has to reload) and that Microsoft decided to change this operation. But I guess any change can be frustrating.Donovan> >Glenn > >------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >-- -Donovan Brooke -Administrator of IT / -Assc. Art Director -Creative Services -Epsen Hillmer Graphics-402.342.1169 X297 ------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: Browser Back button (Matthew A Perosi 2003)
  2. Re: Browser Back button (Donovan 2003)
  3. Re: Browser Back button (Glenn Busbin 2003)
  4. Browser Back button (Donovan 2003)
Glenn, First, your comments had NO helpful information. I believe you had no motive to reply other than to irritate more an already irritated person. If you like provoking people, use another resource please.Glenn Busbin wrote:>>Hello, I have discovered that the IE for OSX (5.2) >>does some different things. 1) It has trouble with JavaScript >>and >> >> > >Never reply on client-side apps for server-side operations. Too many different platforms, too different many browsers, and too many different users. This is the world wide web, not a closed, controlled intranet inside a company. > I don't rely on client-side apps per say, I rely on the majority concensus of the functionality of browsers and W3C. We all have to rely on broswers and standards! If we didn't, we would not know what to code for.I went straight to W3C after posting to the list. I found comments that have never been fully addressed on this list about post and get. These methods have came up in conversation many times here and the feedback I remember is that get is an URL and Post is not. There has been no advice to which one is better. Contrary to this, there is an effort at W3C to make a difference. This effort might have contributed to the decision of the Mac department at Microsoft to not keep variables cached. At W3C it is remarked (in my abridged interpretation) that Post generally should only be used when it is meant as undoable. It also makes note of that the info should not be cached when certain MIME headers (EXPIRES etc.) say that the page is, well, expired. So, maybe there is validity for the is Mac department at Microsoft. It is a fact though that most browsers can recapture values from forms with the back button (and sometimes reload button. The answer to getting this particular browser to work, looks to be using Get instead of post> > >>2) (perhaps most interesting to this list) The browsers back button >>doesn't reload any of the form variables!) >> >> > >It isn't supposed to. > uh, thanks for the insightful information and solution. Its a lil more complicated than that.>>Do I know need to impliment a cookie system just for this one browser? >> >> >> > >No. You need to implement a better navigation system for the site and a better server-side way of tracking carts regardless of browser or platform. That may or may not involve cookies. > that may or may not be a lack of help. Fact is, that on this site, Navigation is very well initiated. However, I don't have control (unless I impliment javascript that gets rid of the tools in the browser) if a user decides to hit his/her back button. I think my navigation is great thanks. Glenn, I would think this issue would be interesting to the list as many people use post instead of get. Your snide comments just show you are an angry person offering no help. My concluding thought is that Microsoft may have have reasons to do this (deriving from the W3C) So I guess I can't complain. However, it is still a frustrating thing that the concessus of actual browser products is to retain those post values (even if one has to reload) and that Microsoft decided to change this operation. But I guess any change can be frustrating.Donovan> >Glenn > >------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >-- -Donovan Brooke -Administrator of IT / -Assc. Art Director -Creative Services -Epsen Hillmer Graphics-402.342.1169 X297 ------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ Donovan

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:

[isfolder] and [filename] (1997) Emailer problems addition (1999) Not reading code (1997) Multiple download orders of the same product? (1997) [WebDNA] SQL with Webdna - good ideas? (2018) [WebDNA] screen size (2011) Some Advise needed (1997) truncating email part II (1997) Separate SSL Server (1997) # fields limited? (1997) Email Formatting (1998) WebCat2: Items xx to xx shown, etc. (1997) limitation found on group searching (1997) Webcatalog, Webstar and Crasharama (1999) WebCatalog 3.0.8 is on FTP... (2000) Trigger action Quandry (2002) Please.. copies of Digest for 7/29 and 7/30? (1997) Follow-Up to: Removing [showif] makes a big difference in speed (1997) totals (1997) HTML Editors (1997)