|
Ali Al Omairi(Abu AlHassan) wrote: Ma'am;
That is Sir to you, unless you mean floated  . I may be dead ringer for Kate Winslet (see my signature), but in reality I am a whacking great chap, which is why I found the Kate Winslet thing funny as I'm about as far removed from her as you can get (or I would be if I grew a beard)! In any case, please call me Keith or Abu Adam.
Anyhoo in response to your question, no I wouldn't do it that way: I'd put them into nested divs, something like:
<div id="tree">
<div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Then you can do something like :
div #tree
{
}
div #tree > div
{
}
div #tree > div > div
{
}
The actual styling depends on what you want to do, this might not be the most efficient.
One further thing I'd like to suggest before you procede: take a look at the tutorials here: http://www.w3schools.com/[^] especially "Learn HTML" and "Learn CSS". I get my student to go through these as an introduction to our "Web Programming" course.
|
|
|
|
|
I am very sorry, Mr. Abu Adam;
over my head, sir;
Help people,so poeple can help you.
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, an easy mistake to make (except in person  ) my name isn't very common.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Generally, Tables are outmoded and are frowned upon.
DIVs for design and better to use a list in a DIV than a Table.
(Also DIVs have CSS capabilities so are more manipulatable for presentation purposes.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Sir;
Help people,so poeple can help you.
|
|
|
|
|
One big thing (given the OP's location) is that divs are much better for RTL (or the wrong way round as I insist upon calling it to her indoors ) and for switching in bilingual sites that need LTR <--> RTL.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello guys!
I am trying to achieve a simple upload of a file and a text parameter from a html form. The html page is deployed on jboss 4.2.3.GA (but the result is the same even if you put it anywhere outside the server, etc. on your C drive). My POST request always seems to be empty. I am executing request in Firefox 4.0 browser. Here is the web page:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title>Testing</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Use the form to call webservice</h1>
<form action="http://localhost:8080/mobileEmailService/service/OEV" method="post" enctype="multipart/form-data">
Picture: <input type="file" name="img"/><br />
Name: <input type="text" name="name"/><br />
<input type="submit" value="Submit" />
</form>
</body>
</html>
I am using HttpFox utility in Firefox to examine my request. The POST data always seems to be empty so the parameters in the servlet are also empty. If i change the enctype="multipart/form-data" to enctype="application/x-www-form-urlencoded" then i can get all parameters, but they are only strings. For name parameter this is ok, but for file i just get the file name string and that is not ok  I need a file.
So does anyone has idea how is this accomplished?
I am using jboss RESTeasy web service to read the request. But jboss resteasy webservices are just servlets in my opinion. But any way, the data does not even get into the request. So that is the main problem. The client does not even send it.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know exactly what the plugin you use does with the post data, but remember that a multipart/form-data POST just puts everything in the body of the request sent to the server. So it is possible the plugin you use just doesn't understand this type of form submit.
I just verified using Fiddler and the POST data should be visible just fine as long as you look at the RAW data being sent to the server.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all,
I'd like to know what do you do in order to prevent the customer to receive 10K thousands of spam mails each day.
Do you put their mail address in the contact page?
If you do so, is there any magic trick that would prevent spam bots to find the e-mail addresses?
Any other idea?
PS: I've read that article[^] and I've found quite interesting in this terms, but I'd like to know (from experienced ![Green Alien | [Alien]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/alien.gif) pians) if those methods work or not.
Thank you in advance! 
|
|
|
|
|
I use a web form for email. That does not expose the email address to the client. It works.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes... I've thought also on this solution... but... I guess that this will work only if I use the robots.txt in order to avoid Google & Co. to avoid reading the file in which I have the e-mail address written.
Is that in that way?
I've prepared the form. Then I've prepared the PHP file that is being executed once the user press the submit button. By doing this what I've only done is to put the mail address just in another file. Why is this better?
Thank you in advance!
|
|
|
|
|
If you have everything configured properly, search bots should not be able to get at your server-side files. Those server side files render to HTML and that is what the search bots see. If you have your form setup the way I do, the postback that is initiated on the button click causes server code to run that sends the email. The client never sees the email address.
As an example, ASPX files are typically not visible from the client side. They are processed on the server side and the HTML page that results is served to the client. By default, I'm pretty sure IIS does not serve ASPX pages to the client. Kinda like how the web.config is not served to the client.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep! thank you... it works as it was expected then.
|
|
|
|
|
As advised, write a web page for contacts...
Alternatively, a simple MailTo call.
<p style="text-align: left">Or Email us at
<a href="mailto:Someone@Somewhere.com">Someone@Somewhere.com</a>
for any reason whatsoever</p>
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
That's just the problem. The email address is there in the HTML, all ready for some scraper to come along and lick its lips when its sees "mailto:"
Cheers,
Peter
ps wasn't my downvote.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for answering DD! as Peter says this is the problem that I want to avoid... having the e-mail address there will give me plenty of spam and I want to avoid it.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys!
I need to consume a WebService using the SOAP 1.1 standard via Telnet in Windows, but I´m getting a "Bad Request (Invalid Verb)" response.
The request is this:
POST /WS_PRU_PRODUCTO_76/ws_initialize.asmx HTTP/1.1
Host: opnt08
Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: 510
SOAPAction: "OpenSystems.WebServices.UI/INITIALIZE_WS"
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<soap:Envelope xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
<soap:Header>
<AuthenticationHeader xmlns="OpenSystems.WebServices.UI">
<User>*******</User>
<Password>*******</Password>
<Instance>********</Instance>
</AuthenticationHeader>
</soap:Header>
<soap:Body>
<INITIALIZE_WS xmlns="OpenSystems.WebServices.UI" />
</soap:Body>
</soap:Envelope>
So, I telnet the host, paste the request, but even before finishing pasting, the response arrives.
Here's the output produced by the Telnet session:
POST /WS_PRU_PRODUCTO_76/ws_initialize.asmx HTTP/1.1
Host: opnt08
Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: 510
SOAPAction: "OpenSystems.WebServices.UI/INITIALIZE_WS"
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<soap:Envelope xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/en
velope/">
<soap:Header>
<AuthenticationHeader xmlns="OpenSystems.WebServices.UI">
<User>*******</User>
<Password>*******</Password>
<Instance>********</Instance>
</AuthenticationHeader>
</soap:Header>
<soap:Body>
<INITIALIZE_WS xmlns="OpenSystems.WebServices.UI/INITIALI
quest
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:05:48 GMT
Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0Z
X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
X-AspNet-Version: 2.0.50727
Cache-Control: private
Content-Length: 0
_WS"
Content-Type: text/html
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:05:48 GMT
Connection: close/
Content-Length: 35
<h1>Bad Request (Invalid Verb)</h1>>
C:\Documents and Settings\cpantoja>
C:\Documents and Settings\cpantoja> </soap:Body>
The syntax of the command is incorrect.
C:\Documents and Settings\cpantoja></soap:Envelope>
this guy here[^] says it might have something to do with the namespaces, but I can't quite understand what he's trying to say.
Any help would be appreciated!
|
|
|
|
|
On one of the webapplications I'm working on we have an option to open a popup for printing pages. This popup first gives you several options followed by a page with a frameset on it. Which is something similar to this:
<html>
<head>
<title>printing</title>
</head>
<frameset rows="100%,0">
<frame src="message.html">
<frame src="content-to-print.html" onload="self.foces(); window.print();">>
</frameset>
</html>
Where the message.html contains the a text and is refreshed to a button to close the popup. The other frame contains the actual content that will be printed using javascript in the onload frame. The page being printed has some rather large (specifically wide) tables on it, which causes the content not to fit on the A4 its printed on. It looks as if IE does not rescale the content of the frame to fit the A4 printer output when using a frameset or something.
The weird part I can't figure out is that if I remove the frameset in a test it works and the content of the content-to-print.html page fits on the A4 paper. I changed it to something like this:
<html>
<head>
<title>printing</title>
</head>
<body>
<div>Printing content</div>
<iframe src="content-to-print.html" style="width: 0px; height: 0px" onload="self.foces(); window.print();">
</body>
</html>
I've tried playing with the DOCTYPE from loose to strict as well as removing it all together. The loose and strict did have some positive effect but didn't remove the problem completely.
Now I know that using framesets is old school, but in this case its not that easy to remove them all. That would take to much time and affect to many parts of the web application. So how can I tell IE to print the exact same way when using a frameset as it does with the iframe solution. Is this at all possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Its been a while since I did anything with framesets, but are you using the doctypes FOR framesets?? cause I remember that display issues can occur without them.
Also do you have any style rules that can be at fault?
Chris J
www.redash.org
|
|
|
|
|
I've tried setting all the pages that are loaded in the frameset as well as the page containing the frameset to the doctype //W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Frameset//EN. Something I've also tried is setting all pages to that doctype except for the one being printed and setting that to doctype loose. Non of this helped in the scaling issue unfortunately.
With regards to the CSS styles, I've checked all styles but can't find any that are applied to the frameset itself or any of the other pages that the frameset loads that would stretch the frameset other then the page being printed.
|
|
|
|
|
not too sure but have you tried adding a css style tage with media print and foc the table to a certain size? Also a css reset may help remove browser specific layout issues, but you will need to add css after that to make a consistant appearance.
When I must debug weird display issues I sometime use background colors on certain elements to get an idea on how the page is being affect.
I make an inline style rule like
style='background-color:red;'
and move it from one block level element at a time. Sometimes you will need to different colors on seperate elements to find the cause. In one case I had a margin rule that was tossing the width of a parent element out of wack....and I think the style for the child was dynamic too...
Anyways, hope that helps!
Chris J
www.redash.org
|
|
|
|
|
hi
something very Strange in Webservice and windows-ce connection....
i have Webservice in my computer that stay on `C:\inetpub\wwwroot\WS_TEST` called `WS_TEST`
my IP is `11.22.33.44`
the connection is: `http://11.22.33.44/WS_TEST/service1.asmx`
in my Windows-CE i have this connection: (see that the IP not equal)
http://99.88.77.66/WS_TEST/service1.asmx
and the windows-ce **connect successfully** to the Webservice - how ?
how to do that only same IP will connect successfully ?
thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
It is one of those things that never occurred to me to ask about before.
I would like to present a web page that has a DIV to the left that is a fixed width (100px say), and the Whole of the rest of the real estate as the other part of the screen, regardless of the width of the users screen.
I can do it by %'s but I want that fixed width left pane.
Please help
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Block elements like divs will try to take up the whole width (unless you float them). Here's something that might do what you're after:
<html>
<head>
<title>Two divs</title>
<style type="text/css">
#left { width: 100px; height: 100px; float: left; background-color: #ccf }
#right { margin-left: 101px; background-color: #fcc }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div id="left">
*Something here*
</div>
<div id="right">
*Something else*
</div>
</body>
</html>
The "margin-left" on the second div is leaving space for the first floated div to fit in.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
