From bob at patin.com Tue Jun 4 09:48:46 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Tue Jun 4 08:47:19 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Displaying FM text block with formatting Message-ID: I've never used this before, but I vaguely recall that FX.php has the ability to display text as it was formatted in FileMaker. Am I remembering this correctly, and if so, what's the command to do that? Thanks, Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker From bob at patin.com Tue Jun 4 11:03:44 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Tue Jun 4 10:02:16 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Displaying FM text block with formatting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9F4D8F1A-B41F-43DD-8EE9-DB08B86C58D7@patin.com> I figured out how to do it: I created a 2nd field that is a calc field: field1 -- my original field with formatted text in it field2 -- a calc field, = getasCSS ( field1 ) Then, in PHP, I use echo html_entity_decode ( $field2 ); and I see my properly formatted text. I'd be interested in hearing if there is a simpler way to do the same thing, without having to use a 2nd field. Thanks for any input, Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 4, 2013, at 10:48 AM, Bob Patin wrote: > I've never used this before, but I vaguely recall that FX.php has the ability to display text as it was formatted in FileMaker. Am I remembering this correctly, and if so, what's the command to do that? > > Thanks, > > Bob Patin > Longterm Solutions LLC > bob@longtermsolutions.com > 615-333-6858 > http://www.longtermsolutions.com > FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > -- > Twitter: bobpatin > AIM: longterm1954 > iChat: bobpatin > -- > Expert FileMaker Consulting > FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From steve at bluecrocodile.co.nz Tue Jun 4 11:24:59 2013 From: steve at bluecrocodile.co.nz (Steve Winter) Date: Tue Jun 4 10:23:35 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Displaying FM text block with formatting In-Reply-To: <9F4D8F1A-B41F-43DD-8EE9-DB08B86C58D7@patin.com> References: <9F4D8F1A-B41F-43DD-8EE9-DB08B86C58D7@patin.com> Message-ID: <01778C92-5C47-426E-950F-011E72B3C7F1@bluecrocodile.co.nz> Howdy Bob That's the way I do it, with both FX and the API? I also have a php function which cleans up the hideous HTML which is generated by getAsCSS and tries to turn it back into something a little more valid?! Cheers Steve > I figured out how to do it: I created a 2nd field that is a calc field: > > field1 -- my original field with formatted text in it > field2 -- a calc field, = getasCSS ( field1 ) > > Then, in PHP, I use > > echo html_entity_decode ( $field2 ); > > and I see my properly formatted text. > > I'd be interested in hearing if there is a simpler way to do the same thing, without having to use a 2nd field. > > Thanks for any input, > > Bob Patin > Longterm Solutions LLC > bob@longtermsolutions.com > 615-333-6858 > http://www.longtermsolutions.com > FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > -- > Twitter: bobpatin > AIM: longterm1954 > iChat: bobpatin > -- > Expert FileMaker Consulting > FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker > > On Jun 4, 2013, at 10:48 AM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> I've never used this before, but I vaguely recall that FX.php has the ability to display text as it was formatted in FileMaker. Am I remembering this correctly, and if so, what's the command to do that? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bob Patin >> Longterm Solutions LLC >> bob@longtermsolutions.com >> 615-333-6858 >> http://www.longtermsolutions.com >> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer >> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet >> -- >> Twitter: bobpatin >> AIM: longterm1954 >> iChat: bobpatin >> -- >> Expert FileMaker Consulting >> FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list Steve Winter +44 777 852 4776 steve@bluecrocodile.co.nz From tony_white at twdesigns.com Thu Jun 20 10:02:48 2013 From: tony_white at twdesigns.com (Tony White) Date: Thu Jun 20 09:00:14 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks Message-ID: Hi All, First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. >From Joel Shapiro a while ago: http://www.phpframeworks.com/ Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html ? and compare this to building a form manually: http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: * Protection against cross site scripting attacks * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. * Protection against web form spoofing. * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. What do you all think? Thanks. All the best, Tony White Tony White Designs, Inc. Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) Tel: 718-797-4175 tony_white@twdesigns.com http://www.twdesigns.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130620/92717e0b/attachment.html From dale.bengston at gmail.com Thu Jun 20 13:04:06 2013 From: dale.bengston at gmail.com (Dale Bengston) Date: Thu Jun 20 12:01:35 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6F9055A8-E060-40E7-8C09-CA0C8950AD49@gmail.com> Okay, Tony. I'll bite on frameworks. Yes, frameworks often take more steps to do something like create a simple form. Sometimes. But there are payoffs that make it well worth the effort of learning that new way of doing it. I use the Cake framework, and the first time I coded a form it was utterly alien and incredibly frustrating to get it working. But the upside is Cake builds in all sorts of security features to protect against SQL injection and cross-site submits. (I won't try to explain how they do it; Cake's documentation can do a far better job.) I'll freely admit that this was really difficult for me, after writing my own PHP code for ten years. But once I got past the frustration and learned enough to be a functional coder again, I will never look back. I am completely freed up from the menial work of hard-coding paginated search results, sortable tables, form validation, AJAX calls, jQuery functions to bind clicks, on and on. I can focus on the things that my clients are really looking to me for, like overall usability. An added benefit of learning a framework like Cake is it's forced me to completely understand and embrace MVC. An ancillary benefit is that every action on a site is contained, and there is very little risk of something breaking somewhere else when I do code modifications. But the big issue for me, and the reason I will never go back to my own self-written framework, is security. There is just no way a solo coder like me can even stay on top of security threats, let alone address them all. But a group of highly-motivated experts contributing to an open-source project like Cake can do it. I choose to stand on the shoulders of these giants. Yes, it's a struggle as an experienced coder to learn someone else's methods and conventions. But in the long run, it's worth the struggle to reap the benefits of a well-written, well-maintained framework. I hope that helped, Dale PS I am not a Cake zealot; it is what I use but there may be other frameworks that are more suited to your projects. On Jun 20, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Tony White wrote: > Hi All, > > First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. > > That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. > > I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. > > There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. > > There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. > > There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. > > >From Joel Shapiro a while ago: > http://www.phpframeworks.com/ > > Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. > > Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. > > Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. > > I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. > > For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... > > http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html > > ? and compare this to building a form manually: > > http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php > > Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. > > This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? > > The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: > > * Protection against cross site scripting attacks > > * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. > > * Protection against web form spoofing. > > * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping > > *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. > > A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. > > For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. > > The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. > > What do you all think? > > Thanks. > > All the best, > > > Tony White > Tony White Designs, Inc. > Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) > Tel: 718-797-4175 > tony_white@twdesigns.com > http://www.twdesigns.com > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130620/7cbb0f14/attachment-0001.html From leo at finalresort.org Thu Jun 20 13:10:58 2013 From: leo at finalresort.org (Leo R. Lundgren) Date: Thu Jun 20 12:08:27 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: <6F9055A8-E060-40E7-8C09-CA0C8950AD49@gmail.com> References: <6F9055A8-E060-40E7-8C09-CA0C8950AD49@gmail.com> Message-ID: I think Dale explained a lot of things very well. Kudos for taking the time and effort to write that answer. Especially the form example speaks for itself. Sure, it's quicker to just hard code the HTML, and there's your form. But what about all the rest of the work and processing, which is by far the majority of the things involved? That's where the big part of the work is, and the creation of the form fields is a drop in the ocean. Again, I think Dale covered most of it in what he said. I don't know why there's even a discussion about this. Just use a good framework, period (expect of course for the rare cases where you need a simple one-page PHP script, which presumably isn't very often). I'd even go as far as putting it this way; If you are unsure about whether you should use a framework or not (for the things we're discussing here), you should use one. When you come to the point that you know whether or not you should, that's when you can choose to not use one ;) Regards, Leo 20 jun 2013 kl. 21.04 skrev Dale Bengston: > Okay, Tony. I'll bite on frameworks. > > Yes, frameworks often take more steps to do something like create a simple form. Sometimes. But there are payoffs that make it well worth the effort of learning that new way of doing it. I use the Cake framework, and the first time I coded a form it was utterly alien and incredibly frustrating to get it working. But the upside is Cake builds in all sorts of security features to protect against SQL injection and cross-site submits. (I won't try to explain how they do it; Cake's documentation can do a far better job.) > > I'll freely admit that this was really difficult for me, after writing my own PHP code for ten years. But once I got past the frustration and learned enough to be a functional coder again, I will never look back. I am completely freed up from the menial work of hard-coding paginated search results, sortable tables, form validation, AJAX calls, jQuery functions to bind clicks, on and on. I can focus on the things that my clients are really looking to me for, like overall usability. > > An added benefit of learning a framework like Cake is it's forced me to completely understand and embrace MVC. An ancillary benefit is that every action on a site is contained, and there is very little risk of something breaking somewhere else when I do code modifications. > > But the big issue for me, and the reason I will never go back to my own self-written framework, is security. There is just no way a solo coder like me can even stay on top of security threats, let alone address them all. But a group of highly-motivated experts contributing to an open-source project like Cake can do it. I choose to stand on the shoulders of these giants. > > Yes, it's a struggle as an experienced coder to learn someone else's methods and conventions. But in the long run, it's worth the struggle to reap the benefits of a well-written, well-maintained framework. > > I hope that helped, > Dale > > PS I am not a Cake zealot; it is what I use but there may be other frameworks that are more suited to your projects. > > > On Jun 20, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Tony White wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. >> >> That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. >> >> I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. >> >> There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. >> >> There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. >> >> There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. >> >> >From Joel Shapiro a while ago: >> http://www.phpframeworks.com/ >> >> Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. >> >> Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. >> >> Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. >> >> I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. >> >> For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... >> >> http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html >> >> ? and compare this to building a form manually: >> >> http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php >> >> Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. >> >> This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? >> >> The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: >> >> * Protection against cross site scripting attacks >> >> * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. >> >> * Protection against web form spoofing. >> >> * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping >> >> *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. >> >> A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. >> >> For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. >> >> The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. >> >> What do you all think? >> >> Thanks. >> >> All the best, >> >> >> Tony White >> Tony White Designs, Inc. >> Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) >> Tel: 718-797-4175 >> tony_white@twdesigns.com >> http://www.twdesigns.com >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -| -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130620/21fee6e1/attachment.html From michael at pre1.com Thu Jun 20 14:47:13 2013 From: michael at pre1.com (Michael Sloper) Date: Thu Jun 20 13:44:38 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: References: <6F9055A8-E060-40E7-8C09-CA0C8950AD49@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5C2F4F6F-01CB-4A0E-B80D-5CC35567EFE9@pre1.com> I am quite interested in this discussion and would love to hear more about it at the Devcon php meeting. I have seen mentioned that the frameworks work with FX but do they also work with FIleMaker's php api ? Michael Sloper On Jun 20, 2013, at 12:10 PM, Leo R. Lundgren wrote: > I think Dale explained a lot of things very well. Kudos for taking the time and effort to write that answer. > > Especially the form example speaks for itself. Sure, it's quicker to just hard code the HTML, and there's your form. But what about all the rest of the work and processing, which is by far the majority of the things involved? That's where the big part of the work is, and the creation of the form fields is a drop in the ocean. Again, I think Dale covered most of it in what he said. > > I don't know why there's even a discussion about this. Just use a good framework, period (expect of course for the rare cases where you need a simple one-page PHP script, which presumably isn't very often). I'd even go as far as putting it this way; If you are unsure about whether you should use a framework or not (for the things we're discussing here), you should use one. When you come to the point that you know whether or not you should, that's when you can choose to not use one ;) > > Regards, Leo > > > 20 jun 2013 kl. 21.04 skrev Dale Bengston: > >> Okay, Tony. I'll bite on frameworks. >> >> Yes, frameworks often take more steps to do something like create a simple form. Sometimes. But there are payoffs that make it well worth the effort of learning that new way of doing it. I use the Cake framework, and the first time I coded a form it was utterly alien and incredibly frustrating to get it working. But the upside is Cake builds in all sorts of security features to protect against SQL injection and cross-site submits. (I won't try to explain how they do it; Cake's documentation can do a far better job.) >> >> I'll freely admit that this was really difficult for me, after writing my own PHP code for ten years. But once I got past the frustration and learned enough to be a functional coder again, I will never look back. I am completely freed up from the menial work of hard-coding paginated search results, sortable tables, form validation, AJAX calls, jQuery functions to bind clicks, on and on. I can focus on the things that my clients are really looking to me for, like overall usability. >> >> An added benefit of learning a framework like Cake is it's forced me to completely understand and embrace MVC. An ancillary benefit is that every action on a site is contained, and there is very little risk of something breaking somewhere else when I do code modifications. >> >> But the big issue for me, and the reason I will never go back to my own self-written framework, is security. There is just no way a solo coder like me can even stay on top of security threats, let alone address them all. But a group of highly-motivated experts contributing to an open-source project like Cake can do it. I choose to stand on the shoulders of these giants. >> >> Yes, it's a struggle as an experienced coder to learn someone else's methods and conventions. But in the long run, it's worth the struggle to reap the benefits of a well-written, well-maintained framework. >> >> I hope that helped, >> Dale >> >> PS I am not a Cake zealot; it is what I use but there may be other frameworks that are more suited to your projects. >> >> >> On Jun 20, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Tony White wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. >>> >>> That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. >>> >>> I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. >>> >>> There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. >>> >>> There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. >>> >>> There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. >>> >>> >From Joel Shapiro a while ago: >>> http://www.phpframeworks.com/ >>> >>> Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. >>> >>> Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. >>> >>> Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. >>> >>> I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. >>> >>> For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... >>> >>> http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html >>> >>> ? and compare this to building a form manually: >>> >>> http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php >>> >>> Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. >>> >>> This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? >>> >>> The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: >>> >>> * Protection against cross site scripting attacks >>> >>> * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. >>> >>> * Protection against web form spoofing. >>> >>> * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping >>> >>> *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. >>> >>> A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. >>> >>> For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. >>> >>> The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. >>> >>> What do you all think? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> >>> Tony White >>> Tony White Designs, Inc. >>> Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) >>> Tel: 718-797-4175 >>> tony_white@twdesigns.com >>> http://www.twdesigns.com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > > > -| > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130620/e2c1f500/attachment-0001.html From leo at finalresort.org Thu Jun 20 15:00:49 2013 From: leo at finalresort.org (Leo R. Lundgren) Date: Thu Jun 20 13:58:18 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: <5C2F4F6F-01CB-4A0E-B80D-5CC35567EFE9@pre1.com> References: <6F9055A8-E060-40E7-8C09-CA0C8950AD49@gmail.com> <5C2F4F6F-01CB-4A0E-B80D-5CC35567EFE9@pre1.com> Message-ID: A PHP framework doesn't stop you from using other PHP code as you wish. The answer to your question is yes. 20 jun 2013 kl. 22.47 skrev Michael Sloper: > > I am quite interested in this discussion and would love to hear more about it at the Devcon php meeting. > > I have seen mentioned that the frameworks work with FX but do they also work with FIleMaker's php api ? > > > Michael Sloper > > > On Jun 20, 2013, at 12:10 PM, Leo R. Lundgren wrote: > >> I think Dale explained a lot of things very well. Kudos for taking the time and effort to write that answer. >> >> Especially the form example speaks for itself. Sure, it's quicker to just hard code the HTML, and there's your form. But what about all the rest of the work and processing, which is by far the majority of the things involved? That's where the big part of the work is, and the creation of the form fields is a drop in the ocean. Again, I think Dale covered most of it in what he said. >> >> I don't know why there's even a discussion about this. Just use a good framework, period (expect of course for the rare cases where you need a simple one-page PHP script, which presumably isn't very often). I'd even go as far as putting it this way; If you are unsure about whether you should use a framework or not (for the things we're discussing here), you should use one. When you come to the point that you know whether or not you should, that's when you can choose to not use one ;) >> >> Regards, Leo >> >> >> 20 jun 2013 kl. 21.04 skrev Dale Bengston: >> >>> Okay, Tony. I'll bite on frameworks. >>> >>> Yes, frameworks often take more steps to do something like create a simple form. Sometimes. But there are payoffs that make it well worth the effort of learning that new way of doing it. I use the Cake framework, and the first time I coded a form it was utterly alien and incredibly frustrating to get it working. But the upside is Cake builds in all sorts of security features to protect against SQL injection and cross-site submits. (I won't try to explain how they do it; Cake's documentation can do a far better job.) >>> >>> I'll freely admit that this was really difficult for me, after writing my own PHP code for ten years. But once I got past the frustration and learned enough to be a functional coder again, I will never look back. I am completely freed up from the menial work of hard-coding paginated search results, sortable tables, form validation, AJAX calls, jQuery functions to bind clicks, on and on. I can focus on the things that my clients are really looking to me for, like overall usability. >>> >>> An added benefit of learning a framework like Cake is it's forced me to completely understand and embrace MVC. An ancillary benefit is that every action on a site is contained, and there is very little risk of something breaking somewhere else when I do code modifications. >>> >>> But the big issue for me, and the reason I will never go back to my own self-written framework, is security. There is just no way a solo coder like me can even stay on top of security threats, let alone address them all. But a group of highly-motivated experts contributing to an open-source project like Cake can do it. I choose to stand on the shoulders of these giants. >>> >>> Yes, it's a struggle as an experienced coder to learn someone else's methods and conventions. But in the long run, it's worth the struggle to reap the benefits of a well-written, well-maintained framework. >>> >>> I hope that helped, >>> Dale >>> >>> PS I am not a Cake zealot; it is what I use but there may be other frameworks that are more suited to your projects. >>> >>> >>> On Jun 20, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Tony White wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. >>>> >>>> That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. >>>> >>>> I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. >>>> >>>> There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. >>>> >>>> There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. >>>> >>>> There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. >>>> >>>> >From Joel Shapiro a while ago: >>>> http://www.phpframeworks.com/ >>>> >>>> Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. >>>> >>>> Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. >>>> >>>> Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. >>>> >>>> I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. >>>> >>>> For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... >>>> >>>> http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html >>>> >>>> ? and compare this to building a form manually: >>>> >>>> http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php >>>> >>>> Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. >>>> >>>> This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? >>>> >>>> The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: >>>> >>>> * Protection against cross site scripting attacks >>>> >>>> * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. >>>> >>>> * Protection against web form spoofing. >>>> >>>> * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping >>>> >>>> *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. >>>> >>>> A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. >>>> >>>> For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. >>>> >>>> The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. >>>> >>>> What do you all think? >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> All the best, >>>> >>>> >>>> Tony White >>>> Tony White Designs, Inc. >>>> Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) >>>> Tel: 718-797-4175 >>>> tony_white@twdesigns.com >>>> http://www.twdesigns.com >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> FX.php_List mailing list >>>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> >> >> -| >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -| -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130620/20df1dec/attachment.html From sthoms at wavecomm.com Thu Jun 20 15:28:09 2013 From: sthoms at wavecomm.com (Steven Thoms) Date: Thu Jun 20 14:25:39 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7FF190FE-8C28-4F89-B539-F34540F20903@wavecomm.com> So, it's clear frameworks are preferred here, and I use them, and largely agree. That said, I often choose to write procedural code for a simple reason; more people can pick it up, read through it and solve a problem. When I have a small client, with a limited budget, I think the kindest, long term solution is to write a neat, well-commented procedural experience. This gives them many more options in future, after I'm gone. If the code is well commented, I believe a novice can often go in, take a peak and maybe avoid spending a bunch of money hiring a big gun with big tools. Security often overrides this calculus, but I wanted to inject the simplicity point for discussion. - Steve On Jun 20, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Tony White wrote: > Hi All, > > First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. > > That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. > > I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. > > There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. > > There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. > > There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. > > >From Joel Shapiro a while ago: > http://www.phpframeworks.com/ > > Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. > > Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. > > Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. > > I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. > > For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... > > http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html > > ? and compare this to building a form manually: > > http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php > > Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. > > This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? > > The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: > > * Protection against cross site scripting attacks > > * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. > > * Protection against web form spoofing. > > * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping > > *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. > > A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. > > For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. > > The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. > > What do you all think? > > Thanks. > > All the best, > > > Tony White > Tony White Designs, Inc. > Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) > Tel: 718-797-4175 > tony_white@twdesigns.com > http://www.twdesigns.com > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From jsfmp at earthlink.net Thu Jun 20 16:42:46 2013 From: jsfmp at earthlink.net (Joel Shapiro) Date: Thu Jun 20 15:40:11 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: <7FF190FE-8C28-4F89-B539-F34540F20903@wavecomm.com> References: <7FF190FE-8C28-4F89-B539-F34540F20903@wavecomm.com> Message-ID: Hiya First - Tony (& Michael), you're in luck :-) We've got someone coming to the group this year who's going to show us how he's using CodeIgniter w/ FM (FX specifically, I believe) and talk about why he decided to make the effort to learn it, and why he, like Dale, "will never go back". Second - Steve: I think you make a really great point. I thought about that kind of thing recently when a new client of mine wanted me to make a small change on a site built by their previous FM/CWP devs. It turned out that the site used both Smarty ("PHP Template Engine") & Dojo ("JavaScript toolkit"), neither of which I knew. I was able to figure them out enough to make the requested changes, but it really got me thinking about the line between a developer's preferred tools & the client's best (long-term) interests. It may be more relevant for consultants than for in-house developers (since a "house" can set their own tools & requirements), but I think it's a good thing to think about when choosing what tools to use on a job. (For instance, I'm a huge fan now of Sass and CSS pre-processing, but if a future developer on one of my sites doesn't know or like Sass it'll be no problem because s/he could just choose to edit the plain CSS files that get produced and totally ignore everything Sass.) Best, -Joel On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Steven Thoms wrote: > So, it's clear frameworks are preferred here, and I use them, and largely agree. > > That said, I often choose to write procedural code for a simple reason; more people can pick it up, read through it and solve a problem. When I have a small client, with a limited budget, I think the kindest, long term solution is to write a neat, well-commented procedural experience. This gives them many more options in future, after I'm gone. If the code is well commented, I believe a novice can often go in, take a peak and maybe avoid spending a bunch of money hiring a big gun with big tools. > > Security often overrides this calculus, but I wanted to inject the simplicity point for discussion. > > - Steve > > On Jun 20, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Tony White wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. >> >> That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. >> >> I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. >> >> There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. >> >> There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. >> >> There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. >> >>> From Joel Shapiro a while ago: >> http://www.phpframeworks.com/ >> >> Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. >> >> Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. >> >> Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. >> >> I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. >> >> For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... >> >> http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html >> >> ? and compare this to building a form manually: >> >> http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php >> >> Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. >> >> This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? >> >> The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: >> >> * Protection against cross site scripting attacks >> >> * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. >> >> * Protection against web form spoofing. >> >> * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping >> >> *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. >> >> A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. >> >> For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. >> >> The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. >> >> What do you all think? >> >> Thanks. >> >> All the best, >> >> >> Tony White >> Tony White Designs, Inc. >> Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) >> Tel: 718-797-4175 >> tony_white@twdesigns.com >> http://www.twdesigns.com >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From sthoms at wavecomm.com Fri Jun 21 09:30:26 2013 From: sthoms at wavecomm.com (Steven Thoms) Date: Fri Jun 21 08:27:54 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Someting to show at DevCon CWP User Group? -> web frameworks In-Reply-To: References: <7FF190FE-8C28-4F89-B539-F34540F20903@wavecomm.com> Message-ID: <4CFCC294-251F-455E-B63E-354C69A2B800@wavecomm.com> This is a great topic for the post-pesentation discussion at DevCon, Can't wait to see you all again, Steve 207 798-0171 On Jun 20, 2013, at 6:42 PM, Joel Shapiro wrote: > Hiya > > First - Tony (& Michael), you're in luck :-) We've got someone coming to the group this year who's going to show us how he's using CodeIgniter w/ FM (FX specifically, I believe) and talk about why he decided to make the effort to learn it, and why he, like Dale, "will never go back". > > Second - Steve: I think you make a really great point. I thought about that kind of thing recently when a new client of mine wanted me to make a small change on a site built by their previous FM/CWP devs. It turned out that the site used both Smarty ("PHP Template Engine") & Dojo ("JavaScript toolkit"), neither of which I knew. I was able to figure them out enough to make the requested changes, but it really got me thinking about the line between a developer's preferred tools & the client's best (long-term) interests. > > It may be more relevant for consultants than for in-house developers (since a "house" can set their own tools & requirements), but I think it's a good thing to think about when choosing what tools to use on a job. (For instance, I'm a huge fan now of Sass and CSS pre-processing, but if a future developer on one of my sites doesn't know or like Sass it'll be no problem because s/he could just choose to edit the plain CSS files that get produced and totally ignore everything Sass.) > > Best, > -Joel > > > On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Steven Thoms wrote: > >> So, it's clear frameworks are preferred here, and I use them, and largely agree. >> >> That said, I often choose to write procedural code for a simple reason; more people can pick it up, read through it and solve a problem. When I have a small client, with a limited budget, I think the kindest, long term solution is to write a neat, well-commented procedural experience. This gives them many more options in future, after I'm gone. If the code is well commented, I believe a novice can often go in, take a peak and maybe avoid spending a bunch of money hiring a big gun with big tools. >> >> Security often overrides this calculus, but I wanted to inject the simplicity point for discussion. >> >> - Steve >> >> On Jun 20, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Tony White wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> First off, I should say that on the topic of web frameworks, I have more questions than answers. >>> >>> That said, I have been researching web frameworks both in the PHP world and in the Ruby world and have some thoughts on the matter. >>> >>> I have to confess a bias...I prefer to code as ?close to the metal? as I can for any given environment. I want the shortest path from point A to point B, unless there is an advantage to inserting more hops along the way. >>> >>> There are lots of blog posts (many of which I?ve read) that talk about the advantages of using a framework versus not using a framework. >>> >>> There are also many blog posts on the web comparing procedural PHP to object-oriented PHP. >>> >>> There is also a lot of documentation about how different frameworks work. I have read through much of the documentation for CodeIgniter and ZEND. >>> >>>> From Joel Shapiro a while ago: >>> http://www.phpframeworks.com/ >>> >>> Having said all that...I?m currently of the opinion that it is sometimes correct to use a web framework and sometime correct to avoid using a web framework. >>> >>> Likewise it is sometimes correct to use object-oriented PHP and sometimes best to use procedural PHP. >>> >>> Any given choice should be guided by pros and cons and how they affect a particular situation. >>> >>> I?ll start off by making the assertion that the web frameworks have greater complexity. This complexity must be balanced by benefits in order to justify the cost. >>> >>> For an example of complexity, have a look at what?s involved using the ZEND framework to add form elements to a web form... >>> >>> http://framework.zend.com/manual/1.12/en/zend.form.standardDecorators.html >>> >>> ? and compare this to building a form manually: >>> >>> http://webcheatsheet.com/PHP/form_processing.php >>> >>> Most people would agree that it is more complicated to use a web framework for this task. >>> >>> This gets us to the question, ?what are the advantages to balance out this type of complexity?? >>> >>> The idea behind a web framework is that it solves a number of recurring problems that will (or might) come up in any given web project. Examples include: >>> >>> * Protection against cross site scripting attacks >>> >>> * The ability to implement unit testing (PHPUnit, RSpec, etc.) to protect against changes breaking code, for example on large projects with multiple team members. >>> >>> * Protection against web form spoofing. >>> >>> * Dynamic database query generation within an Object-relational mapping pattern >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping >>> >>> *** I wish I had a comprehensive list of all the things that a web framework gives you. Please feel free to add to this list. Additions appreciated. >>> >>> A web framework is a collection of code, some of which which will be useful for a given project and some of which will not. There might be advantages in deploying only the pieces of code that are needed for a given project and in the simplest possible way. >>> >>> For example, in the Ruby world, the 2 popular frameworks seem to be Ruby on Rails (RoR) and Sinatra. Ruby developers talk about using RoR in some cases and Sinatra in other cases where they don?t need the overhead of RoR. This method of starting with the amount of code that?s appropriate for a project seems like a good idea. There is also the question of how easy is it to modify a framework for those cases where you need to color outside the lines. >>> >>> The most important question seems to be what problems does a framework solve? If we can answer that question, it will help us make the best decision of when to use a framework and when to keep it simple. >>> >>> What do you all think? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> >>> Tony White >>> Tony White Designs, Inc. >>> Tel: 646-714-2797 (Google Voice) >>> Tel: 718-797-4175 >>> tony_white@twdesigns.com >>> http://www.twdesigns.com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > From jsfmp at earthlink.net Tue Jun 25 13:29:06 2013 From: jsfmp at earthlink.net (Joel Shapiro) Date: Tue Jun 25 12:26:11 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Updating PHP? Message-ID: <042A71A7-66D9-4B5A-8F5D-5C9E6E81DFDC@earthlink.net> Hi all PHP 5.5 was released last week. I'm curious: Do any of you update the PHP on your existing sites? Do you do so for any reasons other than security issues? Thanks, -Joel From leo at finalresort.org Tue Jun 25 13:30:51 2013 From: leo at finalresort.org (Leo R. Lundgren) Date: Tue Jun 25 12:27:58 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Updating PHP? In-Reply-To: <042A71A7-66D9-4B5A-8F5D-5C9E6E81DFDC@earthlink.net> References: <042A71A7-66D9-4B5A-8F5D-5C9E6E81DFDC@earthlink.net> Message-ID: If it works, don't fix it. Unless you need new features in it or there are security aspects you need to patch with it. 25 jun 2013 kl. 21.29 skrev Joel Shapiro: > Hi all > > PHP 5.5 was released last week. > > I'm curious: Do any of you update the PHP on your existing sites? Do you do so for any reasons other than security issues? > > Thanks, > -Joel > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -| From jschwartz at exit445.com Tue Jun 25 13:37:48 2013 From: jschwartz at exit445.com (Jonathan Schwartz) Date: Tue Jun 25 12:34:51 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] PCI Compliance for FMS and OS X Server Message-ID: Hi Folks, I'm back to asking this same question again because it keeps on rearing it's ugly head... Has anyone passed a PCI Compliance scan (for credit card security) using FIleMaker Server 11 or 12 under OS X Server? I am running OS X Server (10.6.8) on a machine with the latest version of FMS 11. It fails due to old OPENSSL, Apache and TomCat. It looks like I would need to stop using the built in version oh HP for FMP Web Publishing and attempt to update the offending modules. Not fun. It might be easier to migrate to a current OS X server and FileMaker 12, but I need to be sure that this is a guarantee of PCI Compliance. For the sake of argument, assume that the php code itself is 100% compliant. I'm just asking about the server environment. For reference, the PCI scan I'm referring to is from trustwave. Passing the scan is required in order for the client to maintain their credit card Gateway. Thanks Jonathan Jonathan Schwartz Exit 445 Group jonathan@exit445.com www.exit445.com cell: 415-370-5011 From steve at bluecrocodile.co.nz Tue Jun 25 13:55:42 2013 From: steve at bluecrocodile.co.nz (Steve Winter) Date: Tue Jun 25 12:52:54 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Updating PHP? In-Reply-To: References: <042A71A7-66D9-4B5A-8F5D-5C9E6E81DFDC@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <10349AA0-B295-47E0-8FAA-404497656249@bluecrocodile.co.nz> I would concur - only upgrade if you need something, which may be a security fix, however I wouldn't ordinarily expect to need to another full release (5.5 as opposed to 5.4.x) to resolve a security issue. One of the risks of moving to a new version is deprecation of functions/functionality (and we all remember the v11 API and it's screens-full of deprecation warnings), so unless you've got really good regression tests in place, or the site is small enough to be able to ensure you've tested every piece of functionality there's a risk that something may break without you being aware of it? YMMV. Cheers Steve > If it works, don't fix it. Unless you need new features in it or there are security aspects you need to patch with it. > > > 25 jun 2013 kl. 21.29 skrev Joel Shapiro: > >> Hi all >> >> PHP 5.5 was released last week. >> >> I'm curious: Do any of you update the PHP on your existing sites? Do you do so for any reasons other than security issues? >> >> Thanks, >> -Joel >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > > > -| > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list Steve Winter +44 777 852 4776 steve@bluecrocodile.co.nz -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130625/b297de2e/attachment-0001.html From jsfmp at earthlink.net Tue Jun 25 14:18:05 2013 From: jsfmp at earthlink.net (Joel Shapiro) Date: Tue Jun 25 13:15:11 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [OFF] Updating PHP? In-Reply-To: <10349AA0-B295-47E0-8FAA-404497656249@bluecrocodile.co.nz> References: <042A71A7-66D9-4B5A-8F5D-5C9E6E81DFDC@earthlink.net> <10349AA0-B295-47E0-8FAA-404497656249@bluecrocodile.co.nz> Message-ID: <5E9944BD-1B51-458C-951C-10145C1E7BD7@earthlink.net> Thanks Leo & Steve That's always been my way -- just like w/ jQuery on existing sites. Thanks for the corroboration :) -Joel On Jun 25, 2013, at 12:55 PM, Steve Winter wrote: > I would concur - only upgrade if you need something, which may be a security fix, however I wouldn't ordinarily expect to need to another full release (5.5 as opposed to 5.4.x) to resolve a security issue. > > One of the risks of moving to a new version is deprecation of functions/functionality (and we all remember the v11 API and it's screens-full of deprecation warnings), so unless you've got really good regression tests in place, or the site is small enough to be able to ensure you've tested every piece of functionality there's a risk that something may break without you being aware of it? > > YMMV. > > Cheers > Steve > >> If it works, don't fix it. Unless you need new features in it or there are security aspects you need to patch with it. >> >> >> 25 jun 2013 kl. 21.29 skrev Joel Shapiro: >> >>> Hi all >>> >>> PHP 5.5 was released last week. >>> >>> I'm curious: Do any of you update the PHP on your existing sites? Do you do so for any reasons other than security issues? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Joel >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> >> >> -| >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > Steve Winter > +44 777 852 4776 > steve@bluecrocodile.co.nz > > > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From malcolm at notyourhomework.net Tue Jun 25 18:05:44 2013 From: malcolm at notyourhomework.net (Malcolm Fitzgerald) Date: Tue Jun 25 17:02:48 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] PCI Compliance for FMS and OS X Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Consider setting up a test machine which you can experiment with before you do anything too daring :-) Then look at the MacPorts project. It will provide you with more up-to-date versions of those programs. Once you've installed them you'll need to take stop WPE and reconfigure it to use your new software. malcolm On 26/06/2013, at 5:37 AM, Jonathan Schwartz wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I'm back to asking this same question again because it keeps on rearing it's ugly head... > > Has anyone passed a PCI Compliance scan (for credit card security) using FIleMaker Server 11 or 12 under OS X Server? > > I am running OS X Server (10.6.8) on a machine with the latest version of FMS 11. It fails due to old OPENSSL, Apache and TomCat. It looks like I would need to stop using the built in version oh HP for FMP Web Publishing and attempt to update the offending modules. Not fun. > > It might be easier to migrate to a current OS X server and FileMaker 12, but I need to be sure that this is a guarantee of PCI Compliance. For the sake of argument, assume that the php code itself is 100% compliant. I'm just asking about the server environment. > > For reference, the PCI scan I'm referring to is from trustwave. Passing the scan is required in order for the client to maintain their credit card Gateway. > > Thanks > > Jonathan > > Jonathan Schwartz > Exit 445 Group > jonathan@exit445.com > www.exit445.com > cell: 415-370-5011 > > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From tim.webko at gmail.com Tue Jun 25 19:12:16 2013 From: tim.webko at gmail.com (Tim 'Webko' Booth) Date: Tue Jun 25 18:09:19 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] PCI Compliance for FMS and OS X Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I have never allowed a client to process credit cards on any FileMaker powered site - or any site I've ever written actually. I send them to a processing gateway that is PCI compliant, and simply see if the payment was successful or not. This approach may not work in all cases. Cheers Webko On 26 June 2013 10:05, Malcolm Fitzgerald wrote: > Consider setting up a test machine which you can experiment with before > you do anything too daring :-) Then look at the MacPorts project. It will > provide you with more up-to-date versions of those programs. Once you've > installed them you'll need to take stop WPE and reconfigure it to use your > new software. > > malcolm > > > On 26/06/2013, at 5:37 AM, Jonathan Schwartz wrote: > > > Hi Folks, > > > > I'm back to asking this same question again because it keeps on rearing > it's ugly head... > > > > Has anyone passed a PCI Compliance scan (for credit card security) using > FIleMaker Server 11 or 12 under OS X Server? > > > > I am running OS X Server (10.6.8) on a machine with the latest version > of FMS 11. It fails due to old OPENSSL, Apache and TomCat. It looks like I > would need to stop using the built in version oh HP for FMP Web Publishing > and attempt to update the offending modules. Not fun. > > > > It might be easier to migrate to a current OS X server and FileMaker 12, > but I need to be sure that this is a guarantee of PCI Compliance. For the > sake of argument, assume that the php code itself is 100% compliant. I'm > just asking about the server environment. > > > > For reference, the PCI scan I'm referring to is from trustwave. Passing > the scan is required in order for the client to maintain their credit card > Gateway. > > > > Thanks > > > > Jonathan > > > > Jonathan Schwartz > > Exit 445 Group > > jonathan@exit445.com > > www.exit445.com > > cell: 415-370-5011 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > FX.php_List mailing list > > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130626/84d3df80/attachment.html From derrick at fogles.net Wed Jun 26 10:53:15 2013 From: derrick at fogles.net (Derrick Fogle) Date: Wed Jun 26 09:50:17 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Converting to FM12? Message-ID: Just now upgrading to FM12 from an old version of FM 8.5. Having trouble getting FX.php to work correctly. Looking for any tips or tricks, known changes that need made in FX files, etc. Thanks! Derrick From leo at finalresort.org Wed Jun 26 10:55:17 2013 From: leo at finalresort.org (Leo R. Lundgren) Date: Wed Jun 26 09:52:21 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Converting to FM12? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Try to find archives of this mailing list. There has been some discussion about FX.php incompatibility with FM 12, as well as fixes for it (I believe they are in the GitHub repository for FX.php). Regards, Leo 26 jun 2013 kl. 18.53 skrev Derrick Fogle: > Just now upgrading to FM12 from an old version of FM 8.5. Having trouble getting FX.php to work correctly. Looking for any tips or tricks, known changes that need made in FX files, etc. > > Thanks! > > Derrick From derrick at fogles.net Wed Jun 26 12:06:11 2013 From: derrick at fogles.net (Derrick Fogle) Date: Wed Jun 26 11:03:11 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Converting to FM12? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <296801C3-D4B3-4D89-BF88-EF2C1B74DA84@fogles.net> D'oh! Turns out my problem was a stupid typo in the server_data file. When I changed the name from ".fp7" I forgot to insert the "m" in the new filename. It works now. Thanks, On Jun 26, 2013, at 11:55 AM, Leo R. Lundgren wrote: > Hi, > > Try to find archives of this mailing list. There has been some discussion about FX.php incompatibility with FM 12, as well as fixes for it (I believe they are in the GitHub repository for FX.php). > > Regards, Leo > > > 26 jun 2013 kl. 18.53 skrev Derrick Fogle: > >> Just now upgrading to FM12 from an old version of FM 8.5. Having trouble getting FX.php to work correctly. Looking for any tips or tricks, known changes that need made in FX files, etc. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Derrick > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list Derrick From KFutter at sbc.vic.edu.au Wed Jun 26 16:24:21 2013 From: KFutter at sbc.vic.edu.au (Kevin Futter) Date: Wed Jun 26 15:21:40 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Converting to FM12? In-Reply-To: <296801C3-D4B3-4D89-BF88-EF2C1B74DA84@fogles.net> Message-ID: Derek, you don't actually need to include the extension when calling the database via FX (if I'm reading you correctly and that's what you're doing). FileMaker Server knows what file extension it supports, and can locate the file with or without the extension. So just calling the database by name only not only works, it's future-proof too! Kev On 27/06/13 4:06 AM, "Derrick Fogle" wrote: >D'oh! Turns out my problem was a stupid typo in the server_data file. >When I changed the name from ".fp7" I forgot to insert the "m" in the new >filename. > >It works now. > >Thanks, > >On Jun 26, 2013, at 11:55 AM, Leo R. Lundgren wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Try to find archives of this mailing list. There has been some >>discussion about FX.php incompatibility with FM 12, as well as fixes for >>it (I believe they are in the GitHub repository for FX.php). >> >> Regards, Leo >> >> >> 26 jun 2013 kl. 18.53 skrev Derrick Fogle: >> >>> Just now upgrading to FM12 from an old version of FM 8.5. Having >>>trouble getting FX.php to work correctly. Looking for any tips or >>>tricks, known changes that need made in FX files, etc. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Derrick >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > >Derrick > >_______________________________________________ >FX.php_List mailing list >FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list [http://www.sbc.vic.edu.au/assets/images/email_logo.gif] St Bernard's College Achieving Excellence By Learning And Doing Kevin Futter Webmaster Ph: +61392891007 | Mobile: Email: KFutter@sbc.vic.edu.au 41 Rosehill Road, Essendon, Victoria, 3040 | Ph: 03 9289 1000 | F: 9337 1741 | www.sbc.vic.edu.au ________________________________ This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential. You must not disclose or use the information in this e-mail if you are not the intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete the e-mail and all copies. The College does not guarantee that this e-mail is virus or error free. The attached files are provided and may only be used on the basis that the user assumes all responsibility for any loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the attached files, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not. The content and opinions in this e-mail are not necessarily those of the College. From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 07:35:57 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 06:32:56 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] PCI Compliance for FMS and OS X Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jonathan, I have a client who runs a PCI compliance test every 30 days; their web apps are powered by FileMaker. They're using a 2-machine configuration and FMSA 12; the web server is Windows 8 Server. I hired a consultant to help me go through my code, and after spending a grand on him (I won't mention the company by name, but we all know it extremely well), I saw that the ONLY thing he did was to add this to every $_POST: htmlspecialchars($_POST['myvar'])) which apparently satisfied the PCI compliance gods. I don't know what else they may have done on the web server (if anything), but this gets them by every month. As to FM Server: we don't capture or store any card numbers, although they do use Plastic to run cards in these venues (tourist attractions); to my knowledge they've not had to do anything with the FM Server machines at all. Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 25, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Jonathan Schwartz wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I'm back to asking this same question again because it keeps on rearing it's ugly head... > > Has anyone passed a PCI Compliance scan (for credit card security) using FIleMaker Server 11 or 12 under OS X Server? > > I am running OS X Server (10.6.8) on a machine with the latest version of FMS 11. It fails due to old OPENSSL, Apache and TomCat. It looks like I would need to stop using the built in version oh HP for FMP Web Publishing and attempt to update the offending modules. Not fun. > > It might be easier to migrate to a current OS X server and FileMaker 12, but I need to be sure that this is a guarantee of PCI Compliance. For the sake of argument, assume that the php code itself is 100% compliant. I'm just asking about the server environment. > > For reference, the PCI scan I'm referring to is from trustwave. Passing the scan is required in order for the client to maintain their credit card Gateway. > > Thanks > > Jonathan > > Jonathan Schwartz > Exit 445 Group > jonathan@exit445.com > www.exit445.com > cell: 415-370-5011 > > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130627/d5d5d907/attachment.html From malcolm at notyourhomework.net Thu Jun 27 07:54:44 2013 From: malcolm at notyourhomework.net (Malcolm Fitzgerald) Date: Thu Jun 27 06:51:44 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] PCI Compliance for FMS and OS X Server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6A2F289F-2E18-44E6-997D-B7746279D437@notyourhomework.net> On 27/06/2013, at 11:35 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > I hired a consultant to help me go through my code, and after spending a grand on him (I won't mention the company by name, but we all know it extremely well), I saw that the ONLY thing he did was to add this to every $_POST: > > htmlspecialchars($_POST['myvar'])) Cleansing your input is a must. If that's what they did you've spent the money well. You're better off than you were before they visited. malcolm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130627/e3724a47/attachment.html From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 08:17:12 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 07:14:09 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] PCI Compliance for FMS and OS X Server In-Reply-To: <6A2F289F-2E18-44E6-997D-B7746279D437@notyourhomework.net> References: <6A2F289F-2E18-44E6-997D-B7746279D437@notyourhomework.net> Message-ID: <39FBFE0F-2CCF-475E-A4E9-B8641E9C5541@patin.com> Well, true; I just wish he'd told me that was all he was going to do and charged a more reasonable rate. He also missed a lot of pages that I had to clean up, but as the saying goes, you're paying for the knowledge, not the actual work... Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 27, 2013, at 8:54 AM, Malcolm Fitzgerald wrote: >> htmlspecialchars($_POST['myvar'])) > > > > Cleansing your input is a must. If that's what they did you've spent the money well. You're better off than you were before they visited. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130627/c363c04c/attachment.html From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 12:06:31 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:03:30 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question Message-ID: I have a site with default CSS set to color all my HREF links; however, for one of my pages I need to change the default colors so that the link will show up. Assuming I have this: a:link { color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a:visited { text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; font-weight: bold; } a:hover { text-decoration: underline; color:#00FF00; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a:active { text-decoration: none; color: #FF0000; font-weight: bold; } ... how do I set the un-hovered and hovered states of this one link to some different colors? Is there a way to 'override' the CSS above for one or more links? Thanks, Bob Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 12:14:17 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:11:13 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? BP Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > I have a site with default CSS set to color all my HREF links; however, for one of my pages I need to change the default colors so that the link will show up. > > Assuming I have this: > > > a:link { > color:#FFFFFF; > text-decoration: none; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a:visited { > text-decoration: none; > color: #FFFFFF; > font-weight: bold; > } > a:hover { > text-decoration: underline; > color:#00FF00; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a:active { > text-decoration: none; > color: #FF0000; > font-weight: bold; > } > > ... how do I set the un-hovered and hovered states of this one link to some different colors? Is there a way to 'override' the CSS above for one or more links? > > Thanks, > > Bob > > Bob Patin > Longterm Solutions LLC > bob@longtermsolutions.com > 615-333-6858 > http://www.longtermsolutions.com > FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > -- > Twitter: bobpatin > AIM: longterm1954 > iChat: bobpatin > -- > Expert FileMaker Consulting > FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 12:20:35 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:17:31 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <36A92783-2EFA-4055-9EBA-C13F7B4DEB33@patin.com> Well, sort of solved it; when I hover it doesn't really totally change to my HOVER color, but I see the underline in the hover color. Here's how I did it: HYPERLINK IS HERE I tried putting the SPAN outside the link, but it gets overwritten... any ideas on how to make this work completely? Thanks, BP Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. > > Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? > > BP > > Bob Patin > Longterm Solutions LLC > bob@longtermsolutions.com > 615-333-6858 > http://www.longtermsolutions.com > FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > -- > Twitter: bobpatin > AIM: longterm1954 > iChat: bobpatin > -- > Expert FileMaker Consulting > FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> I have a site with default CSS set to color all my HREF links; however, for one of my pages I need to change the default colors so that the link will show up. >> >> Assuming I have this: >> >> >> a:link { >> color:#FFFFFF; >> text-decoration: none; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a:visited { >> text-decoration: none; >> color: #FFFFFF; >> font-weight: bold; >> } >> a:hover { >> text-decoration: underline; >> color:#00FF00; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a:active { >> text-decoration: none; >> color: #FF0000; >> font-weight: bold; >> } >> >> ... how do I set the un-hovered and hovered states of this one link to some different colors? Is there a way to 'override' the CSS above for one or more links? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bob >> >> Bob Patin >> Longterm Solutions LLC >> bob@longtermsolutions.com >> 615-333-6858 >> http://www.longtermsolutions.com >> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer >> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet >> -- >> Twitter: bobpatin >> AIM: longterm1954 >> iChat: bobpatin >> -- >> Expert FileMaker Consulting >> FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From rogerkiwi at mac.com Thu Jun 27 12:39:46 2013 From: rogerkiwi at mac.com (Roger Moffat) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:36:50 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. > > Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. Roger From andy at fmpug.com Thu Jun 27 12:48:04 2013 From: andy at fmpug.com (Andy Gaunt) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:45:02 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> Message-ID: Bob, If you apply a class to the link then it will use that style because it has more weight in the CSS than just your regular link styling. e.g. a:link { color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a:visited { text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; font-weight: bold; } a:hover { text-decoration: underline; color:#00FF00; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a:active { text-decoration: none; color: #FF0000; font-weight: bold; } New class for alternate links. a.secondary_style:link { color:#DDD; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a.secondary_style:visited { color: #EEE; } a.secondary_style:hover { color:#FFF; } a.secondary_style:active { color: #DDD; } Cheers - Andy On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >> >> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? > > If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. > > Roger_______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 12:48:11 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:45:07 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> Message-ID: Roger, Doesn't a call to a stylesheet need to be in the HEAD? If so, how do I embed the 2nd stylesheet down in the HTML after my nav button CSS (which uses the default colors)? When I just put my include down in the HTML, after my nav links but before my content, it was ignored. Thanks, Bob Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: > On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >> >> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? > > If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130627/15f3a53f/attachment.html From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 12:51:18 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:48:14 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> Message-ID: <0AE5CFBB-742F-4780-AB51-267D330FDB81@patin.com> Perfect, that was what I was looking for! Thanks, bob On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Andy Gaunt wrote: > Bob, > > If you apply a class to the link then it will use that style because it has more weight in the CSS than just your regular link styling. > > e.g. > > a:link { > color:#FFFFFF; > text-decoration: none; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a:visited { > text-decoration: none; > color: #FFFFFF; > font-weight: bold; > } > a:hover { > text-decoration: underline; > color:#00FF00; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a:active { > text-decoration: none; > color: #FF0000; > font-weight: bold; > } > > New class for alternate links. > > a.secondary_style:link { > color:#DDD; > text-decoration: none; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a.secondary_style:visited { > color: #EEE; > } > a.secondary_style:hover { > color:#FFF; > } > a.secondary_style:active { > color: #DDD; > } > > > > Cheers > > - Andy > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: > >> >> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >> >>> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >>> >>> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? >> >> If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. >> >> Roger_______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 12:55:22 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 11:52:18 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> Message-ID: <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> Andy, When I try it I'm not seeing what I expect, but rather the default; in my link I put this: HYPERLINK Is that how I should call it? Thanks, Bob On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Andy Gaunt wrote: > Bob, > > If you apply a class to the link then it will use that style because it has more weight in the CSS than just your regular link styling. > > e.g. > > a:link { > color:#FFFFFF; > text-decoration: none; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a:visited { > text-decoration: none; > color: #FFFFFF; > font-weight: bold; > } > a:hover { > text-decoration: underline; > color:#00FF00; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a:active { > text-decoration: none; > color: #FF0000; > font-weight: bold; > } > > New class for alternate links. > > a.secondary_style:link { > color:#DDD; > text-decoration: none; > font-weight: bold; > cursor:pointer; > } > a.secondary_style:visited { > color: #EEE; > } > a.secondary_style:hover { > color:#FFF; > } > a.secondary_style:active { > color: #DDD; > } > > > > Cheers > > - Andy > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: > >> >> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >> >>> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >>> >>> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? >> >> If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. >> >> Roger_______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From andy at fmpug.com Thu Jun 27 13:22:26 2013 From: andy at fmpug.com (Andy Gaunt) Date: Thu Jun 27 12:19:23 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> Message-ID: <55D7CC7F-5B8A-428D-9444-E8BFF3D62153@fmpug.com> Bob, Looks good from here. Did you place the new code below your standard in your CSS? If not your standard may overwrite it. Let me know - Andy On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:55 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > Andy, > > When I try it I'm not seeing what I expect, but rather the default; in my link I put this: > > HYPERLINK > > Is that how I should call it? > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Andy Gaunt wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> If you apply a class to the link then it will use that style because it has more weight in the CSS than just your regular link styling. >> >> e.g. >> >> a:link { >> color:#FFFFFF; >> text-decoration: none; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a:visited { >> text-decoration: none; >> color: #FFFFFF; >> font-weight: bold; >> } >> a:hover { >> text-decoration: underline; >> color:#00FF00; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a:active { >> text-decoration: none; >> color: #FF0000; >> font-weight: bold; >> } >> >> New class for alternate links. >> >> a.secondary_style:link { >> color:#DDD; >> text-decoration: none; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a.secondary_style:visited { >> color: #EEE; >> } >> a.secondary_style:hover { >> color:#FFF; >> } >> a.secondary_style:active { >> color: #DDD; >> } >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> - Andy >> >> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >>> >>>> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >>>> >>>> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? >>> >>> If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. >>> >>> Roger_______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 13:26:53 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 12:23:49 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: <55D7CC7F-5B8A-428D-9444-E8BFF3D62153@fmpug.com> References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> <55D7CC7F-5B8A-428D-9444-E8BFF3D62153@fmpug.com> Message-ID: i did, but it didn't seem to *see* it... OH well, I'll putz with it some more. Thanks, Bob Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:22 PM, Andy Gaunt wrote: > Looks good from here. Did you place the new code below your standard in your CSS? > > If not your standard may overwrite it. > > Let me know > > - Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130627/84777960/attachment-0001.html From jsfmp at earthlink.net Thu Jun 27 13:49:47 2013 From: jsfmp at earthlink.net (Joel Shapiro) Date: Thu Jun 27 12:46:44 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> Message-ID: Hey Bob CSS pages don't always refresh when you refresh the main (php) page. Try loading the CSS page directly in your browser (e.g. site.com/style.css ) and see if you see your new secondary_style stuff. If not, reload that css page in your browser. Then go back to your main/php page and reload that. FWIW: It doesn't matter if a.secondary_style comes before or after a in your stylesheet -- although if you had *another* set of a.secondary_style, the set that is lower on the page would be the defining styles. Best, -Joel On Jun 27, 2013, at 11:55 AM, Bob Patin wrote: > Andy, > > When I try it I'm not seeing what I expect, but rather the default; in my link I put this: > > HYPERLINK > > Is that how I should call it? > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Andy Gaunt wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> If you apply a class to the link then it will use that style because it has more weight in the CSS than just your regular link styling. >> >> e.g. >> >> a:link { >> color:#FFFFFF; >> text-decoration: none; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a:visited { >> text-decoration: none; >> color: #FFFFFF; >> font-weight: bold; >> } >> a:hover { >> text-decoration: underline; >> color:#00FF00; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a:active { >> text-decoration: none; >> color: #FF0000; >> font-weight: bold; >> } >> >> New class for alternate links. >> >> a.secondary_style:link { >> color:#DDD; >> text-decoration: none; >> font-weight: bold; >> cursor:pointer; >> } >> a.secondary_style:visited { >> color: #EEE; >> } >> a.secondary_style:hover { >> color:#FFF; >> } >> a.secondary_style:active { >> color: #DDD; >> } >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> - Andy >> >> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >>> >>>> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >>>> >>>> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? >>> >>> If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. >>> >>> Roger_______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Thu Jun 27 22:31:38 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Thu Jun 27 21:28:33 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] Before working for VIncent (Vinnie) Ramirez Message-ID: If you are contacted by Vincent (Vinnie) Ramirez to do any FileMaker work, you should first contact me back-channel. Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker From dale.bengston at gmail.com Fri Jun 28 08:06:09 2013 From: dale.bengston at gmail.com (Dale Bengston) Date: Fri Jun 28 07:03:11 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [off] simple CSS question In-Reply-To: References: <917D86E0-0B2B-41B7-A422-7E2155546D95@mac.com> <016A2E89-28E8-4B81-9ED0-7CAC709A117C@patin.com> Message-ID: <15608992-CB03-4BEC-9211-72EAB8C187E9@gmail.com> Hi Bob, A variation on Andy's method is to make the second set conditional on being in a container. To wit: a:link { color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a:visited { text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; font-weight: bold; } a:hover { text-decoration: underline; color:#00FF00; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } a:active { text-decoration: none; color: #FF0000; font-weight: bold; } /*Alternate links*/ .secondary_style a:link { color:#DDD; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; cursor:pointer; } .secondary_style a:visited { color: #EEE; } .secondary_style a:hover { color:#FFF; } .secondary_style a:active { color: #DDD; } Then any links within a wrapper of

or
or will obey the second set of rules. Any anchor tags wrapped in a container with class secondary_style will inherit attributes from your main anchor definitions, plus override anything that's different. Hope this helps, Dale On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:49 PM, Joel Shapiro wrote: > Hey Bob > > CSS pages don't always refresh when you refresh the main (php) page. > > Try loading the CSS page directly in your browser (e.g. site.com/style.css ) and see if you see your new secondary_style stuff. If not, reload that css page in your browser. Then go back to your main/php page and reload that. > > FWIW: It doesn't matter if a.secondary_style comes before or after a in your stylesheet -- although if you had *another* set of a.secondary_style, the set that is lower on the page would be the defining styles. > > Best, > -Joel > > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 11:55 AM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> Andy, >> >> When I try it I'm not seeing what I expect, but rather the default; in my link I put this: >> >> HYPERLINK >> >> Is that how I should call it? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bob >> >> >> >> On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Andy Gaunt wrote: >> >>> Bob, >>> >>> If you apply a class to the link then it will use that style because it has more weight in the CSS than just your regular link styling. >>> >>> e.g. >>> >>> a:link { >>> color:#FFFFFF; >>> text-decoration: none; >>> font-weight: bold; >>> cursor:pointer; >>> } >>> a:visited { >>> text-decoration: none; >>> color: #FFFFFF; >>> font-weight: bold; >>> } >>> a:hover { >>> text-decoration: underline; >>> color:#00FF00; >>> font-weight: bold; >>> cursor:pointer; >>> } >>> a:active { >>> text-decoration: none; >>> color: #FF0000; >>> font-weight: bold; >>> } >>> >>> New class for alternate links. >>> >>> a.secondary_style:link { >>> color:#DDD; >>> text-decoration: none; >>> font-weight: bold; >>> cursor:pointer; >>> } >>> a.secondary_style:visited { >>> color: #EEE; >>> } >>> a.secondary_style:hover { >>> color:#FFF; >>> } >>> a.secondary_style:active { >>> color: #DDD; >>> } >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> - Andy >>> >>> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Roger Moffat wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:14 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >>>> >>>>> Solved... I just wrapped the link in a SPAN tag. >>>>> >>>>> Is there a way to do it in the stylesheet instead? In other words, could I have a separate of link definitions that I could invoke on desired links? >>>> >>>> If on that one page you can call another stylesheet after the first one, then you can put the differences in to a second stylesheet, and only that page would call it. >>>> >>>> Roger_______________________________________________ >>>> FX.php_List mailing list >>>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Sun Jun 30 12:31:44 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Sun Jun 30 11:28:32 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question Message-ID: I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this reload a main page; reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: // process GUEST_ADD form $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); window.scrollTo(0, 0); return false; }); So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. Thanks for any help, Bob Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC P.O. Box 3408 Brentwood, TN 37024 bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com iChat: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 Twitter: bobpatin Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus -- FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting From bob at patin.com Sun Jun 30 12:55:45 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Sun Jun 30 11:52:32 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <073F8D42-AAD2-4958-AA15-6C8EB420AAB6@patin.com> Better way to ask the question: Isn't there a way to say, "do process B only *after* process A is finished"? Thanks, Bob On Jun 30, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this > > reload a main page; > reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it > > Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: > > // process GUEST_ADD form > $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ > var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); > $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); > window.scrollTo(0, 0); > return false; > }); > > So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. > > I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. > > Thanks for any help, > > Bob > > Bob Patin > Longterm Solutions LLC > P.O. Box 3408 > Brentwood, TN 37024 > bob@longtermsolutions.com > 615-333-6858 > http://www.longtermsolutions.com > iChat: bobpatin > AIM: longterm1954 > Twitter: bobpatin > Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus > -- > FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > -- > FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker > PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting_______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Sun Jun 30 13:16:53 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Sun Jun 30 12:13:36 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Did it a different way... I added JQuery to the process page so that it loads the guest page AFTER the PHP has done its thing... works fine... But I seem to recall someone (Steve Winter?) telling me about a way to have a 2nd process occur after the 1st has concluded... BP On Jun 30, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this > > reload a main page; > reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it > > Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: > > // process GUEST_ADD form > $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ > var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); > $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); > window.scrollTo(0, 0); > return false; > }); > > So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. > > I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. > > Thanks for any help, > > Bob > > Bob Patin > Longterm Solutions LLC > P.O. Box 3408 > Brentwood, TN 37024 > bob@longtermsolutions.com > 615-333-6858 > http://www.longtermsolutions.com > iChat: bobpatin > AIM: longterm1954 > Twitter: bobpatin > Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus > -- > FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > -- > FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker > PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting_______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From jdcunha at supportgroup.com Sun Jun 30 14:00:53 2013 From: jdcunha at supportgroup.com (James Dcunha) Date: Sun Jun 30 12:57:42 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <32F4B8EA-31A2-4F1E-96F6-2BEB3A63E663@supportgroup.com> I normally return a status flag value back to the callback function. Based on the flag value it would execute the 2nd process. James Sent from my Phone On Jun 30, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > Did it a different way... I added JQuery to the process page so that it loads the guest page AFTER the PHP has done its thing... works fine... > > But I seem to recall someone (Steve Winter?) telling me about a way to have a 2nd process occur after the 1st has concluded... > > BP > > On Jun 30, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this >> >> reload a main page; >> reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it >> >> Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: >> >> // process GUEST_ADD form >> $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ >> var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); >> $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); >> window.scrollTo(0, 0); >> return false; >> }); >> >> So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. >> >> I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. >> >> Thanks for any help, >> >> Bob >> >> Bob Patin >> Longterm Solutions LLC >> P.O. Box 3408 >> Brentwood, TN 37024 >> bob@longtermsolutions.com >> 615-333-6858 >> http://www.longtermsolutions.com >> iChat: bobpatin >> AIM: longterm1954 >> Twitter: bobpatin >> Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus >> -- >> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer >> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet >> -- >> FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker >> PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting_______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From dsomar at gmail.com Sun Jun 30 14:24:06 2013 From: dsomar at gmail.com (Denis Somar) Date: Sun Jun 30 13:20:51 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question In-Reply-To: <32F4B8EA-31A2-4F1E-96F6-2BEB3A63E663@supportgroup.com> References: <32F4B8EA-31A2-4F1E-96F6-2BEB3A63E663@supportgroup.com> Message-ID: <1372623846171.fa1914d2@Nodemailer> I believe there is a function called enqueue for JavaScript or jquery that queues all processes On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 4:01 PM, James Dcunha wrote: > I normally return a status flag value back to the callback function. Based on the flag value it would execute the 2nd process. > James > Sent from my Phone > On Jun 30, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >> Did it a different way... I added JQuery to the process page so that it loads the guest page AFTER the PHP has done its thing... works fine... >> >> But I seem to recall someone (Steve Winter?) telling me about a way to have a 2nd process occur after the 1st has concluded... >> >> BP >> >> On Jun 30, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >> >>> I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this >>> >>> reload a main page; >>> reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it >>> >>> Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: >>> >>> // process GUEST_ADD form >>> $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ >>> var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); >>> $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); >>> window.scrollTo(0, 0); >>> return false; >>> }); >>> >>> So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. >>> >>> I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. >>> >>> Thanks for any help, >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> Bob Patin >>> Longterm Solutions LLC >>> P.O. Box 3408 >>> Brentwood, TN 37024 >>> bob@longtermsolutions.com >>> 615-333-6858 >>> http://www.longtermsolutions.com >>> iChat: bobpatin >>> AIM: longterm1954 >>> Twitter: bobpatin >>> Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus >>> -- >>> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer >>> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet >>> -- >>> FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker >>> PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting_______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.iviking.org/pipermail/fx.php_list/attachments/20130630/f299c528/attachment.html From dale.bengston at gmail.com Sun Jun 30 15:53:17 2013 From: dale.bengston at gmail.com (Dale Bengston) Date: Sun Jun 30 14:50:07 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question In-Reply-To: <1372623846171.fa1914d2@Nodemailer> References: <32F4B8EA-31A2-4F1E-96F6-2BEB3A63E663@supportgroup.com> <1372623846171.fa1914d2@Nodemailer> Message-ID: <4C9C3E44-69AD-494B-AA41-33B67C787049@gmail.com> Bob, I have done this by using $.ajax() to submit a form and act on the results. $.ajax() in jQuery comes with all sorts of built-in goodies that let you do things like use post for the form so your target PHP script gets data just as though the form were submitted traditionally. It also has pre- and post-submit settings, like beforeSend, and callbacks for success, error, complete, etc. You could use the complete callback to wait until the ajax call is done to run a 2nd function. Here's a simple one that replaces the content of a details record with a busy "loading" gif before it makes a GET request for a different record. Then on success, it swaps in the new content. It doesn't use POST because I'm not submitting a form via ajax. var loaderGif = 'Loading'; function refreshDetail (itemNumber) { $.ajax({ beforeSend: function(){ $("#DetailWell").hide().html(loaderGif).fadeIn("fast") }, url: "https://mysite.com/Products/product_detail/" + itemNumber, success: function(detail) { $("#DetailWell").hide().html(detail).fadeIn("slow"); } }); } Hope this helps, Dale On Jun 30, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Denis Somar wrote: > I believe there is a function called enqueue for JavaScript or jquery that queues all processes > > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 4:01 PM, James Dcunha wrote: > > I normally return a status flag value back to the callback function. Based on the flag value it would execute the 2nd process. > > James > > Sent from my Phone > > On Jun 30, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > > > Did it a different way... I added JQuery to the process page so that it loads the guest page AFTER the PHP has done its thing... works fine... > > > > But I seem to recall someone (Steve Winter?) telling me about a way to have a 2nd process occur after the 1st has concluded... > > > > BP > > > > On Jun 30, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > > > >> I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this > >> > >> reload a main page; > >> reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it > >> > >> Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: > >> > >> // process GUEST_ADD form > >> $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ > >> var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); > >> $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); > >> window.scrollTo(0, 0); > >> return false; > >> }); > >> > >> So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. > >> > >> I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. > >> > >> Thanks for any help, > >> > >> Bob > >> > >> Bob Patin > >> Longterm Solutions LLC > >> P.O. Box 3408 > >> Brentwood, TN 37024 > >> bob@longtermsolutions.com > >> 615-333-6858 > >> http://www.longtermsolutions.com > >> iChat: bobpatin > >> AIM: longterm1954 > >> Twitter: bobpatin > >> Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus > >> -- > >> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer > >> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet > >> -- > >> FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker > >> PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting_______________________________________________ > >> FX.php_List mailing list > >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > > > _______________________________________________ > > FX.php_List mailing list > > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > > > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list From bob at patin.com Sun Jun 30 17:32:34 2013 From: bob at patin.com (Bob Patin) Date: Sun Jun 30 16:29:16 2013 Subject: [FX.php List] [ off ] Quick JQuery question In-Reply-To: <32F4B8EA-31A2-4F1E-96F6-2BEB3A63E663@supportgroup.com> References: <32F4B8EA-31A2-4F1E-96F6-2BEB3A63E663@supportgroup.com> Message-ID: <04800EC9-30E2-479F-A60C-6414C548E5D2@patin.com> Dale, that does help... I'll have to keep that for when a process takes a while to load. The one I needed it for happens pretty quickly, and I realized that, since PHP processes first, I simply put a JQuery call at the bottom of my processing page, so that after the processing is done it calls the parent page into which the results are displayed... Thanks, and thanks to the others who replied; all good info, time to dig a little and figure out some new ways to do things. Bob Bob Patin Longterm Solutions LLC bob@longtermsolutions.com 615-333-6858 http://www.longtermsolutions.com FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet -- Twitter: bobpatin AIM: longterm1954 iChat: bobpatin -- Expert FileMaker Consulting FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker On Jun 30, 2013, at 3:00 PM, James Dcunha wrote: > I normally return a status flag value back to the callback function. Based on the flag value it would execute the 2nd process. > > James > > Sent from my Phone > > On Jun 30, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Bob Patin wrote: > >> Did it a different way... I added JQuery to the process page so that it loads the guest page AFTER the PHP has done its thing... works fine... >> >> But I seem to recall someone (Steve Winter?) telling me about a way to have a 2nd process occur after the 1st has concluded... >> >> BP >> >> On Jun 30, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Bob Patin wrote: >> >>> I have a function that adds an element to an array; after that happens I want to do this >>> >>> reload a main page; >>> reload a subsidiary page that takes the array and makes a table out of it >>> >>> Sometimes it works right, sometimes not, when I use this line: >>> >>> // process GUEST_ADD form >>> $('.content').delegate('#guestform', 'submit', function(){ >>> var str = $('#guestform').serialize(); >>> $('.content').fadeOut(200).load('guest_process.php?'+str).load('guest.php').fadeIn(200); >>> window.scrollTo(0, 0); >>> return false; >>> }); >>> >>> So as you can see, I'm submitting a form, processing it with "guest_process.php"; then, I want to reload "guest.php" which in turn calls a page that loads in my array as a table. >>> >>> I'm thinking that the 2nd LOAD needs to wait for the first to finish, is that correct, and if so, how do I write it? I vaguely recall having to do this in a page on another project, but can't find the code now. >>> >>> Thanks for any help, >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> Bob Patin >>> Longterm Solutions LLC >>> P.O. Box 3408 >>> Brentwood, TN 37024 >>> bob@longtermsolutions.com >>> 615-333-6858 >>> http://www.longtermsolutions.com >>> iChat: bobpatin >>> AIM: longterm1954 >>> Twitter: bobpatin >>> Google+: http://www.longtermsolutions.com/plus >>> -- >>> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer >>> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet >>> -- >>> FileMaker hosting and consulting for all versions of FileMaker >>> PHP ? Full email services ? Free DNS hosting ? Colocation ? Consulting_______________________________________________ >>> FX.php_List mailing list >>> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FX.php_List mailing list >> FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org >> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list > _______________________________________________ > FX.php_List mailing list > FX.php_List@mail.iviking.org > http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list