World: r3wp
[Web] Everything web development related
| older newer | first last |
| eFishAnt 13-Jan-2009 [1547x2] | The message about tables in here at 31-Jan-2005 2:42:06 AM wrecks the AltME tables when it sends its output the the Web Browser. I have seen this before. (press the Print icon in AltME and look at this message group in the browser, table lines are missing) |
Youzer...re-installing Opera 9.63 fixed the problem. Now it works perfectly. My guess is that the sitecheck2.opera.com was revalidated by the new install process, so the site allowed a connection. Dunno, just a guess. A couple days of trying to fix my code went into that unsure lesson. | |
| Reichart 13-Jan-2009 [1549x2] | :) |
Please post the Table bug bug to Feedback, thanks. | |
| Oldes 13-Jan-2009 [1551] | not escaping html tags is quite serious bug. |
| amacleod 13-Jan-2009 [1552x2] | Anyone have experience using Oliverier Auverlot's Magic! I have tried several times to get it up and running but never got there... |
Also, Is there any advantage to it over RSP? | |
| Steeve 13-Jan-2009 [1554] | you can ask on french BBS (even in english) http://www.digicamsoft.com/cgi-bin/rebelBB.cgi Several users use Magic |
| amacleod 14-Jan-2009 [1555] | Thanks, I've tried about 4 times over the last few years and keep giving up. The config files keep screwing me. tried under XP, 98, using WAMP and under Ubuntu... |
| DideC 14-Jan-2009 [1556x5] | Did you manage to make rebol cgi works? I mean, is the webserver able to run .cgi script with rebol? Rebol/core need to be installed on the server, chmoded and you must have put the right sheeband at the beginning of the .cgi script. A simple .cgi script like this one is a good test : |
#!/usr/bin/rebol -cs
rebol []
print "Content-type: text/html^/"
print {
<<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD><TITLE>Rebol CGI test page</TITLE></HEAD>
<BODY>}
print ["Server date time is:" now]
print {</BODY></HTML>}
| |
Then, when this script runs well, put the same sheeband at the beginning of the magic.cgi file. | |
Then I have a file test.rhtml (handler for .rhtml must be configured in the webserver) with this content to test magic : | |
<html><head>Test Magic</head> <body> Magic fonctionne t'il ?<P/> <REBOL> print [ "<b>Oui il fonctionne !</b><BR>Date et heure du serveur : <i>" now </i> <P/> "Configuration actuelle :<BR>" "m-library-path : " m-library-path <BR> "m-session-path : " m-sessions-path <BR> "curdir : " curdir <BR> "home : " system/options/home <BR> ] </REBOL> </body> </html> | |
| amacleod 14-Jan-2009 [1561] | I'll try those suggestions. It's a bit more methodical than what I was doing... Thanks, Dide. |
| Kaj 14-Jan-2009 [1562] | Did you consider QuarterMaster instead? I used to want to go with Magic!, but QM is a much more modern design |
| amacleod 14-Jan-2009 [1563] | I've looked at QM but I did not get it. I did not understand what it did. Magic seems to provide some basic gui elements that seemed like a quick way to build a website. I'll have another look at QM though. QM runs on Cheyenne? |
| Chris 14-Jan-2009 [1564] | Yes. |
| Kaj 15-Jan-2009 [1565x3] | Chris will correct me if Iīm wrong, but I think thatīs basically the point. :-) QM is a generic framework implementing a Model/View/Controller architecture that leaves you free to plug in parts for each, whereas Magic! offers a basic set of rigid REBOL web widgets |
With QM you can basically build any website, without having to reinvent the wheel on the lower level web server technology, while with Magic you would quickly run into the walls of the provided functionality | |
Magic! could theoretically be an easier way to start, learning even less HTML, but if you canīt get through its configuration, you might as well start with QM | |
| Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [1568x2] | I have to say, that I don't get that MVC concept at all. It seems to me, like some academic head came with that model some time back, while reality might be elsewhere. Do you really desing your apps, that its fits MVC model? E.g. that famous Ruby and other DB "automatic" schemas which are supposed be so cool have to be rudiculous to someone who actually knows SQL. Soon after you start reading docs you find out, that when you get to more complicated DB schema, they only provide you with excuses that you can't have everything. Sometimes frameworks work against you :-) Not that I would not understand their advantages otoh, hence I am asking, if QM is really so usefull? The thing is, that I tried to give it a try several times, and I did not know what to do actually, but maybe I am extremely stupid for such stuff, and am only able to work with plain cgi/fcgi ... |
If there is some full example implementation of some site for e.g., I could give it a try ... last time I tried was some year ago or so ... | |
| Kaj 15-Jan-2009 [1570] | Youīre mixing up MVC and Active Record, and I vaguely remember discussing this before |
| Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [1571] | Not mixing - those relate. Does not have QM as a framework an Active record like data organisation? |
| Kaj 15-Jan-2009 [1572x5] | I do agree it takes time to figure out MVC, and I think the terms are too much inspired by a technological point of view. Itīs really about separating the concerns of the usual stakeholders working on websites, or applications in general: the programmer/database designer, the consultant designing the business logic, the graphics/UI designer and the secretary maintaining the content |
Yes, but Active Record is just an implementation of the Model and can be swapped out for something else | |
Basically always when someone thinks this separation is too complicated, he is thinking from his own perspective assuming he would have to maintain the whole site and hop between tasks | |
Once you start thinking from the perspectives of very different people having to maintain very different aspects of systems, it makes perfect sense; and coincidentally also explains many of the problems with existing systems through lack of separation of concerns | |
Would you write 20.000 similar web pages for a web store, or would you write one template and store the properties of the goods in a database, for example? | |
| Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [1577x4] | I am always thinking from such perspective! My simple tagging system completly separates presentation from scripts. In such regards, concept like rebol server pages is something I can't absolutly agree with. So if QM uses RSP, then where is the separation? |
I work with driving comments sections, which tell what kind of handler should parse/maintain sections, but without being destructive to existing design. | |
It is not about me not thinking about those issues, it is about finding "the ideal one". So far I like Gabriele's Temple for e.g. | |
.... but - I do rather primitive things. So maybe later with more advanced stuff, I might finally "get it" | |
| Kaj 15-Jan-2009 [1581] | QMīs Controllers read and write data from Models and plug it into View templates, so there you have it |
| Robert 15-Jan-2009 [1582] | Best MVC example: OSX. The thing is not the separation all speak about (Model = Date, View = GUI, Control = App logic) but how to get it to work together. And this is (normally) done by passing messages between these three. Like you click a button and a "loadrecord" message is sent to the Data part. IIRC the nice thing is, that more than one "function, object, ..." can react on such a message. |
| amacleod 15-Jan-2009 [1583] | I would like to see more examples of how this works. I kind of get why its nice to seperate tasks on a large scale site but is there still an advantage for a small self built/maintained site. |
| Chris 15-Jan-2009 [1584x5] | You can with QM, should you wish, only use the Controller. My (evolving) advice would be to learn QM by only using the Controller. |
I usually test new features starting there. That's where the flow is and you can do everything within the Controller context. | |
Even if you chuck the View and Model parts, my Controller whips plain CGI : ) | |
am: I'd encourage exploration of QM's source. Most of the code covers mezzanines that address typical WebApp problems. The philosophy is to 'Think REBOL'. | |
I've gone to lengths to make the source as transparent as possible (even if my commenting sucks). | |
| eFishAnt 16-Jan-2009 [1589] | Chris, you could set your color settings to white on white... |
| Chris 16-Jan-2009 [1590] | {color: lemon-juice;}
|
| eFishAnt 18-Jan-2009 [1591x2] | Perhaps that is a secret code. what's the tuple for lemon-juice? RGBA = 255.255.00 ? |
...meant RGBA = 255.255.0.0 | |
| PeterWood 18-Jan-2009 [1593x2] | Alan From your posting on the Rebol-France BB, it looks as though the formattng of your AddHandler declarations in your httpd.conf file are not correct. I use these: AddHandler cgi-script .cgi AddHandler cgi-script .r #Following entry added to enable Magic! AddHandler magic .rhtml Action magic /magic/cgi-bin/magic.cgi |
The Script Alias I use for Magic! is ScriptAlias /magic/cgi-bin/ "/Users/peter/Sites/magic/cgi-bin/" | |
| amacleod 19-Jan-2009 [1595] | Thanks Peter, I'll give those suggestions a try.. |
| Pekr 20-Jan-2009 [1596] | Dunno if this group is appropriate, but we don't have marketing related one. Does anyone use some advanced web access analytics to improve SEO? |
| older newer | first last |