Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:03 pm
javascript can't change anything server-side either... not all by itself anyway.akimm wrote:but i'm saying, thats not to say you can then add it to my server. Thereby changing my sites HTML elements.
A community of PHP developers offering assistance, advice, discussion, and friendship.
http://forums.devnetwork.net/
javascript can't change anything server-side either... not all by itself anyway.akimm wrote:but i'm saying, thats not to say you can then add it to my server. Thereby changing my sites HTML elements.
That's why you always validate server-side. You never know when someone is going to get stupid on you and try something like that.akimm wrote:Wow everah, I never knew you could do crap like that. Thats uncouth!
Frappr had security bugs due to XmlHttp and JavaScript... That would be a good reason to meEverah wrote:Dude, frappr sucks without Javascript. It is nasty, seriously.I think most fears stems back from JS being a client side utility that does stuff on the client. It may go way back to the days of the great cookie scare, but I would guess it has something to do with people being feaked out about things happening on their machine because a website deep in cyberland wanted it to happen that way.Burrito wrote:I don't understand people's fear of JS....it seems totally unfounded to me. What is it about JS that pushes people off? Is it just that it's something new and unknown to them? Is it that it can be someone erratic in different browsers? What is it that scares them away?
eratic in different browser? I consider that as an understatementBurrito wrote:I don't understand people's fear of JS....it seems totally unfounded to me. What is it about JS that pushes people off? Is it just that it's something new and unknown to them? Is it that it can be someone erratic in different browsers? What is it that scares them away?
I know many good, even kick-arse developers that don't have the faintest idea about the existence of AJAX.... But that's probably because they don't target the web...ole wrote: AJAX is important. I don't think it can be ignored. Any good developer should be conversant in AJAX (not me yet, I've only tickered) but I don't expect every new website to use AJAX, ever.
un‧couth /ʌnˈkuθ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uhn-kooth] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA PronunciationThe Ninja Space Goat wrote:what does uncouth mean?
Actually, how much is a language worth if there isn't a 'standard' implementation?Burrito wrote: but you can hardly blame the language itself for people using or 'mis-using' it. It's also not fair to paint a negative picture of it based on people's implementation of it...flashy or not.
Very nice. I thought to myself once, 'I bet feyd can't double as a dictionary'. I guess I was wrong.feyd wrote:un‧couth /ʌnˈkuθ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uhn-kooth] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA PronunciationThe Ninja Space Goat wrote:what does uncouth mean?
–adjective
1. awkward, clumsy, or unmannerly: uncouth behavior; an uncouth relative who embarrasses the family.
2. strange and ungraceful in appearance or form.
3. unusual or strange.
[Origin: bef. 900; ME; OE uncūth (see un-1, couth2); c. D onkond]
—Related forms
un‧couth‧ly, adverb
un‧couth‧ness, noun
—Synonyms 1. discourteous, rude, uncivil. See boorish. 3. odd, unfamiliar.
—Antonyms 1. courteous.
The "internet" doubles as my dictionary. I have no need to be a human one, although I probably could memorize a great percentage of one rather quickly. But enough off-topic silliness.Everah wrote:Very nice. I thought to myself once, 'I bet feyd can't double as a dictionary'. I guess I was wrong.
It means in a sense, not good.The Ninja Space Goat wrote:what does uncouth mean?