RE: CFInstall fails & Blocked port 51010
Andrew Scott said: > That port does not show up with this program or netstat -na Do any ports show up at all? After I have run a lockdown script on a system Fport fails silently and doesn't show open ports, so it does not necessarily mean that nothing is listening. Jochem [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
> Perhaps Sean needs to make it more clear that his team's decision > should not be considered an endorsement from the company he works for. > Sounds fair enough. I'm sure he will be happy to clarify the situation > when he gets back. > I think this is the critical point. For me, having followed Sean's blog since a long time, it's not a problem, but I feel it can cause confusion and be potentially misleading. I actually have seen a few fellow CF developers perceiving the fact that the Code Guidelines and the Mach II guide are on MM's Livedocs server as an official endorsement from MM. A specific disclaimer could be a good idea. Massimo Foti http://www.massimocorner.com Co-Author of Dreamweaver MX 2004 Magic: http://www.dwmagic.com/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
This assumes the MachII wasn't the best solution for them. If it was, then rebuiling from scratch would have been a waste of time. It seems like MACR is screwed. Whatever code they use will be assumed to be best, even though a good developer knows that what works for one situation will not be best for another. This entire thread is probably the biggest waste of time I've seen on this list (and yea, I know I'm adding to it). If MACR chose the best code for their site, that should be the end of it. -Raymond Camden > > I understand the tradeoff. I'm just saying that MM is big > enough with enough money and skilled programmers to write > some of the tightest, fastest, most optimized code around if > they wanted to. The extra few dollars to make the code 'fast > but inflexibility' (it really isn't inflexible, it's just > specific to the needs of the MM site) is worth it to avoid > what started this entire thread. To have anyone see an error > on a website, let alone for there to be an error in the first > place is just not acceptable (in my mind when thinking of a > multi-million dollar internet software company). > > > There is almost always a trade-off between flexibility, > abstraction, > > etc. and performance, but one typically tries to strike the right > > balance between the two extremes. The right balance > typically falls > > between the cost of extending and maintaining a fast but > inflexibility > > application, and the cost of having to throw hardware or other > > optimizations as a slow but highly configurable application. I'm > > certain Sean's team understands this equation and has made their > > decisions accordingly. > > > > Christian > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
Well, in the interest of putting this thread to bed, let me try to wrap things up by saying that when Sean comes back, I will discuss this issue with him. Although I don't have a problem with Macromedia's web team using Mach II or Sean contributing to Mach II development, his actions should not be interpreted as an official Macromedia endorsement of any one project over another. Christian On Feb 9, 2004, at 1:56 AM, Michael Dinowitz wrote: > I understand the tradeoff. I'm just saying that MM is big enough with > enough > money and skilled programmers to write some of the tightest, fastest, > most > optimized code around if they wanted to. The extra few dollars to > make the > code 'fast but inflexibility' (it really isn't inflexible, it's just > specific to the needs of the MM site) is worth it to avoid what > started this > entire thread. To have anyone see an error on a website, let alone > for there > to be an error in the first place is just not acceptable (in my mind > when > thinking of a multi-million dollar internet software company). > > > There is almost always a trade-off between flexibility, abstraction, > > etc. and performance, but one typically tries to strike the right > > balance between the two extremes. The right balance typically falls > > between the cost of extending and maintaining a fast but > inflexibility > > application, and the cost of having to throw hardware or other > > optimizations as a slow but highly configurable application. I'm > > certain Sean's team understands this equation and has made their > > decisions accordingly. > > > > Christian > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
> I think this is another example of where *you* believe Macromedia > screwed up. No disrepect meant here Christian, but there are a few of us here who are of the opinion that MM selecting MachII to use on their site is a glowing endorsement of the framework It sounds like MM's way of saying "Hey, if you want a HIGH traffic site, then you should use MachII rather than the others" As Matt and Michael have said, the framework has code which isn't required, and using it means that you've got "bloat code" which is going to slow down the site (a fraction) and cause complications which aren't necessary The size of MM with their resources should have allowed them to build something from scratch which did the job perfectly, had no superfluous code and was optimized to the hilt would have made a better impression of the product as your pages would be the best they possibly could, rather than using MachII's coding/template structure That's my opinion anyways, and it probably means nothing to MM itself as Sean and his team have already built the site using MachII, so it's a moot point [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: PST Files
Kevin, Use Access as a front end to your SQL Server tables. Then, use the Access import tool to import your messages from Outlook. Access has Outlook/Exchange as an import option. HTH, Jeff Garza _ From: Parker, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 9:56 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: PST Files Can anyone tell me if its possible to export the contents of a folder in a PST (Outlook) file to SQL Server such that I can extract the date the email was sent into a separate field. Outlook has some export features but does not appear to export the date the email was sent. +++ Kevin Parker Web Services Manager WorkCover Corporation p: 08 8233 2548 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: www.workcover.com +++ This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee only. It may contain information that is protected by legislated confidentiality and/or is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you are prohibited from disseminating, distributing or copying this e-mail. Any opinion expressed in this e-mail may not necessarily be that of the WorkCover Corporation of South Australia. Although precautions have been taken, the sender cannot warrant that this e-mail or any files transmitted with it are free of viruses or any other defect. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and destroy the original e-mail and any copies. _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
> As Matt and Michael have said, the framework has code > which isn't required, and using it means that you've > got "bloat code" which is going to slow down the site > (a fraction) and cause complications which aren't > necessary I think this is an inescapable outcome whenever any generic framework is used. The point of using a framework isn't to maximize performance, but to maximize ease of maintenance. If Mach II does that sufficiently, it's a good choice for the MM site or any other. Personally, I'm not entirely sold on Mach II yet, but I think it may be a suitable framework for CFMX applications. > The size of MM with their resources should have allowed > them to build something from scratch which did the job > perfectly, had no superfluous code and was optimized to > the hilt would have made a better impression of the > product as your pages would be the best they possibly > could, rather than using MachII's coding/template structure Sure, they could have done this, but I don't know that it would have been the right choice. Keep in mind that the expenses they accrue are reflected in the cost of the software you buy. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
> > I hear this "secret sauce" argument all the time and > > frankly think it is without merit. I have never walked > > into an organization and had trouble hitting the ground > > running because I had never seen the methodology, > > framework, or style in use at that organization. > > [stacy] There's a big difference between you and an average > developer getting up to speed on grunt work in a web app > though. ;) It's been my experience that most average, competent developers have no trouble with those issues either, just as American visitors to England have little trouble remembering to drive on the other side of the road. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
CFMX + SQL Server in windows only security mode
Hi all, Try as I might, I cannot get CF to connect to SQL Server in "Windows Only" security mode with specially created accounts or even the sa account. I ask because it is considered a security best-practice to enforce Windows-only security in SQL Server, but obviously I need CF to work. If I switch to mixed-mode, it works fine. Am I missing something here? Can CF only connect if mixed-mode security is enabled in SQL Server? Thanks JM [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Co-Location ?
> Can anyone else confirm whether or not CF Server can > legally be run on Win2k3 Web Edition? Yes, CFMX can legally be run on Windows Server 2003 Web Edition. MS SQL Server can not. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
> For years, Fusebox has been criticized by those who > stand at a distance and throw stones at it while > refusing to contribute or become involved in improvements > to it. While this would characterize my actions with regard to Fusebox, it would also characterize my actions with regard to Soviet communism. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
About session variables..
Hi all: I'm trying to delete all session variables when I close the IE window. I checked the use of the J2EE session variables. It's enough ? Regards __ MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez Microsoft Certified System Engineer. DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo COPEXTEL, S.A. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFMX + SQL Server in windows only security mode
> Try as I might, I cannot get CF to connect to SQL Server in > "Windows Only" security mode with specially created accounts > or even the sa account. I ask because it is considered a > security best-practice to enforce Windows-only security in > SQL Server, but obviously I need CF to work. > > If I switch to mixed-mode, it works fine. Am I missing > something here? Can CF only connect if mixed-mode security > is enabled in SQL Server? Yes, the MS SQL Server JDBC driver in CFMX requires native SQL logins and can't use Windows authentication. If you must use Windows authentication, you may be able to use the ODBC Socket, but I'd recommend against this. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re:Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
Michael - You are absolutely correct. For Macromedia to use a framework on their site implies the site is built according to a cookie cutter design. Further, as many people on this list have already pointed out, using a framework implies endorsement of that framework. I totally disagree with the notion, however, that a custom framework should be developed as it will bring up endless speculation as to what the company is endorsing. Macromedia would be better off using no framework at all. Let's face it, a framework is just a loosely connected group of ideas anyways, that offers a temporary development efficency until something new (read: flash RIAs, CFCs, UDFs, none of which were anticipated by any of the major public CF frameworks) comes along. No one is going to build something that anticipates the greater efficencies gained through new features or capacities, and (except for the most trivial Web sites) no site is going to be maintainable for very long under such conditions. Think of it as the Web equivalent of Moore's law. Something new is always coming along at a fairly regular schedule, and Macromedia would be better off avoiding unintended endorsements that could come back to haunt their customers when they try to take advantage of the latest standards in a few years. Complete rewrites of sites are the result of this confounded logic, and they don't really do much good for your customers. One other criticism of this practice of 'adopting a framework' that would be very fair is they are all written in English. Considering the current trends in offshoring and labor tinkering, customers are being provided with a poor quality product when they receive a site coded and documented in English. They would be better off using a framework that supports Kenji, Mandarin, Arabic and Cyrillic, and there is no framework in wide adoption that meets this basic criteria. Developing large scale Web sites without the use of a framework would avoid all of these problems. A total lack of standards would remove the element of endorsement and the appearance of a 'cookie-cutter' approach to development. It would give teams the ability to rapidly implement anything new thing they felt like, when they felt like it, and without having to go through a massive rewrite of code along the way. It would remove the limitations of language and nuances which prevent the understanding of ideas across cultures. Angus McFee -Original Message- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:07 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re:Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II I think it is totally foolish for MM to be using Mach-II on their site. Lets be honest here. FB and Mach-II are frameworks. They allow programmers to write code quickly because parts of the code is already written. They also allow multiple programmers to work on a project because they all have to use the same framework (the front of HoF has a small piece of framework vs. methodology). So far this sounds good, right? The problem with every framework that exists is that it has to be generalized. It is almost totally non-specific because it has to be used on site A, site B, etc. This leads to code that may work but is not the tightest, fastest or even the most optimized for the site. MM should be going the tight, optimized, elegant code route. Instead they're going the 'mass production' route. They should be beyond that point. No, I'm not against FB, Mach-II or any other framework. As I said, they have their time and place. It's just when you want a site to be perfect (or close to it), you write it custom. Create a solid methodology and stick to it. Make sure your programmers stick to it. Organize your code and your resources. Don't do ANY code that is not necessary. Frameworks like Mach-II have a lot of code that is necessary for the framework but not always necessary for the site. - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
Philip Arnold wrote: > The size of MM with their resources should have allowed them to build > something from scratch which did the job perfectly, had no > superfluous code and was optimized to the hilt would have made a > better impression of the product as your pages would be the best they > possibly could, rather than using MachII's coding/template structure I suspect that MM's web team is as time-poor as the rest of the web teams out there. Working at Macromedia doesn't remove the pressure of a deadline or solve resourcing shortages. They're using Mach-II for some smaller apps they need to build beyond the Dylan65 architecture. > That's my opinion anyways, and it probably means nothing to MM itself > as Sean and his team have already built the site using MachII, so > it's a moot point. No. The point is not moot. Macromedia.com is *not* built in Mach-II. The Dylan65 project was released well in advance of Mach-II emerging as a framework. Mach-II is being used for some specific point-applications on the website. How do I know all this? I actually bother to read Sean's blog: http://www.corfield.org/blog/past/2003_11.html#000203 -- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
On Feb 9, 2004, at 9:09 AM, Philip Arnold wrote: > No disrepect meant here Christian, but there are a few of us here who > are of the opinion that MM selecting MachII to use on their site is a > glowing endorsement of the framework Point taken. I was referring specifically to the statement that Macromedia "screwed up" by using Mach II. My impression is that very few people actually have a problem with this, however I also acknowledge that we should be more clear about the fact that we are not officially endorsing any particular project over another. When Sean gets back into town, I will discuss this with him. Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Page Cache..
Hi there: I'd like to avoid back button in the IE...I have a wizard with 3 pages..If u click on the button Step 2 u are not allowed to go back to the page 1. I used CFcache tag with timestamp="0" but it doesn't work..any idea? regards __ MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez Microsoft Certified System Engineer. DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo COPEXTEL, S.A. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
On Feb 9, 2004, at 10:02 AM, Geoff Bowers wrote: > Macromedia.com is *not* built in Mach-II. The Dylan65 project was > released well in advance of Mach-II emerging as a framework. Mach-II > is > being used for some specific point-applications on the website. Thanks for bringing this up, Geoff. This is a very important point. Mach II is something the web team experimented with, found increased their productivity, and now uses for some projects. It is NOT the framework used for Macromedia.com. Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: easy dhtml menu
You may also want to look at http://www.milonic.com Cutter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Check out http://www.dynamicdrive.com/ they have heaps of 'em! > > Peter Tilbrook > Transitional Services - Enterprise eSolutions > Centrelink (http://www.centrelink.gov.au) > 2 Faulding Street > Symonston ACT 2609 > > Tel: (02) 62115927 > > > "Daniel > Farmer" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: CF-Talk > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > l.com> > cc: > >Subject: easy dhtml > menu > 06/02/2004 > 18:48 > > Please respond > to > cf-talk | > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
On Feb 9, 2004, at 9:56 AM, Angus McFee wrote: > Macromedia would be better off using no framework at all. Let's face > it, a framework is just a loosely connected group of ideas anyways, > that offers a temporary development efficency until something new > comes along. I guess frameworks mean different things to different people. Personally, I can't imagine building any application without some sort of framework, even a very small and lightweight one. I have found that frameworks (not specifically Mach II, but frameworks in general) make development much more efficient, and applications easier to extend and maintain. However, this should not be interpreted as a Macromedia endorsement for frameworks in general. :) Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Macromedia.com is *not* built on Mach-II
Macromedia.com is *not* built on Mach II. It is built with a custom framework called Dylan65. Mach-II is being used for some very specific applications. Please bother to read Sean Corfields blog. For example: http://www.corfield.org/blog/past/2003_11.html#000203 Dylan65 was released to production in Feb 2003. How long do people think MM has been running on CFMX??? Is using Mach-II for production at MM an endorsement of the technology? Of course -- officially or unofficially, who cares? It appears to work there, and appears to work well for what they want. Mach-II follows a standard design pattern -- if they wanted that design pattern should they build it again or contribute to an existing community group that has already got much of the way?? Would any other commercial team of developers have done differently?? -- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
- Original Message - From: "Philip Arnold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 7:09 AM Subject: RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II > > I think this is another example of where *you* believe Macromedia > > screwed up. > > No disrepect meant here Christian, but there are a few of us here who > are of the opinion that MM selecting MachII to use on their site is a > glowing endorsement of the framework but...MM didn't select MachII to use on their site. Sean and his team selected MachII to use on the parts of MM's site that they are responsible for. Unless I misunderstand the dynamic, that doesn't represent MM and their entire site/corporation (?). Nowhere on MM's site does it say, "Proudly built with Mach-II", or "Now with 75% more Mach-II", or anything that would imply that MM as a company is endorsing the framework. Sure, I take the use of MachII as a glowing endorsement by Sean of the framework, but that's hardly been kept a secret, as Sean's involvement has been out in the open from the get-go. As far as the various comments regarding Sean's coding standards document, I can absolutely see where people could mistake this for "The Gospel according to MM". However, there are no links (that I am aware of) from the livedocs (or anywhere else on MM's site) to this document. It does not say anywhere on the document that this is "The Gospel according to MM". Even so, I concede that it's easy enough to misinterpret, and the document should be presented (to the public, at least) from Sean's personal site. I'm gonna side with the folks who have suggested that MM is in a no-win situation here. If they had created their own framework, people would have been clamoring for it to be made public, as it would be taken as the "right way" to code CF. If they implemented no framework whatsoever, they would have lost whatever advantages the framework provides (faster development, easier development within a group, etc). When it comes right down to brass tacks, the MM site is no different than any other Web site. It is there to convey information, and gather feedback. The method by which that end is accomplished should be up to the developers, as it is up to us with our own sites. Charlie [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re:CFMX + SQL Server in windows only security mode
Thank you very much Dave. JM >> Try as I might, I cannot get CF to connect to SQL Server in >> "Windows Only" security mode with specially created accounts >> or even the sa account. I ask because it is considered a >> security best-practice to enforce Windows-only security in >> SQL Server, but obviously I need CF to work. >> >> If I switch to mixed-mode, it works fine. Am I missing >> something here? Can CF only connect if mixed-mode security >> is enabled in SQL Server? > >Yes, the MS SQL Server JDBC driver in CFMX requires native SQL logins and >can't use Windows authentication. If you must use Windows authentication, >you may be able to use the ODBC Socket, but I'd recommend against this. > >Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >http://www.figleaf.com/ >phone: 202-797-5496 >fax: 202-797-5444 > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
(Admin) Enough weekend fun
Over the weekend the list rules about technical debates tend to be looser (re: the latest MM Mach-II thread). As it is no longer the weekend, lets please end this thread and move on to technical questions and answers. Thank you [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Reversing a list
What is the simplest way to reverse a list? i.e "A,B,C" becomes "C,B,A". Need it to work in both CF 5 and MX. Thanks Brian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: (Admin) Enough weekend fun
I agree. When Angus McFee comes out of the woodwork, that is generally a signal that it is time to stop a particular discussion. M -Original Message- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:36 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: (Admin) Enough weekend fun Over the weekend the list rules about technical debates tend to be looser (re: the latest MM Mach-II thread). As it is no longer the weekend, lets please end this thread and move on to technical questions and answers. Thank you [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Reversing a list
> -Original Message- > From: G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: maandag 9 februari 2004 16:41 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Reversing a list > > What is the simplest way to reverse a list? > > i.e "A,B,C" becomes "C,B,A". Need it to work in both CF 5 and MX. > > Thanks > Brian > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Reversing a list
It's easy to write one, but here's one i found http://www.cflib.org/udf.cfm?ID=51 _ From: G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:41 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Reversing a list What is the simplest way to reverse a list? i.e "A,B,C" becomes "C,B,A". Need it to work in both CF 5 and MX. Thanks Brian _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Reversing a list
If is a list which consists of single values as in your example, you could use the built in coldfusion reverse function. Kola -Original Message- From: G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 February 2004 15:41 To: CF-Talk Subject: Reversing a list What is the simplest way to reverse a list? i.e "A,B,C" becomes "C,B,A". Need it to work in both CF 5 and MX. Thanks Brian _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFMX + SQL Server in windows only security mode
If you are using Windows mode - you need to have a user account set up on the server. Then add this account to the SQL database. If you are using SQL server mode, then you only need a login and PW on the SQL database. (best practice) == Stop spam on your domain, Anti-spam solutions http://www.clickdoug.com/mailfilter.cfm For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com == Aspire to Inspire before you Retire or Expire! - Original Message - From: J M To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 7:30 AM Subject: CFMX + SQL Server in windows only security mode Hi all, Try as I might, I cannot get CF to connect to SQL Server in "Windows Only" security mode with specially created accounts or even the sa account. I ask because it is considered a security best-practice to enforce Windows-only security in SQL Server, but obviously I need CF to work. If I switch to mixed-mode, it works fine. Am I missing something here? Can CF only connect if mixed-mode security is enabled in SQL Server? Thanks JM [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Co-Location ?
Any problem / issues running MySQL on Window Server 2003 Web Edition? Rick -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 9:35 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Co-Location ? > Can anyone else confirm whether or not CF Server can > legally be run on Win2k3 Web Edition? Yes, CFMX can legally be run on Windows Server 2003 Web Edition. MS SQL Server can not. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
Hey there hi there ho there, I was wondering what others have used to strip the content out of web pages? I am working on a system that collects pages and archives them; however, only the content needs to be stored (i.e. not the navigation, images, extra page fodder). The sites it is archiving are vast so it would have to rather generic solution. I have seen this kind of thing before, but only for single specific sites. Does anyone know a good method to do it generically? I was leaning toward one of these but I am open to whatever * run the collected html through tidy (or jtidy) then (somehow) use xslt * (somehow) use a regular _expression_ on the collected html if anyone has done this before please let me know of pitfalls or recommendations - BTW I have time not money so any pay solutions are right out. Thanks -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
No. Bottom line here is just no. There is no generic way of getting content off a web page without getting the non-content (nav, etc.). You can strip the HTML tags from a page but that dies vs. a page with CSS navigation. All you can do it build a specific spider for a specific site type. There's really no way around it. I've got dozens of spiders and the only thing generic about them are the way that it gets the content, not how it parses it (the actual regexs). > Hey there hi there ho there, > > I was wondering what others have used to strip the content out of web > pages? I am working on a system that collects pages and archives them; > however, only the content needs to be stored (i.e. not the navigation, > images, extra page fodder). > > The sites it is archiving are vast so it would have to rather generic > solution. I have seen this kind of thing before, but only for single > specific sites. Does anyone know a good method to do it generically? > > I was leaning toward one of these but I am open to whatever > > * run the collected html through tidy (or jtidy) then (somehow) use xslt > * (somehow) use a regular _expression_ on the collected html > > if anyone has done this before please let me know of pitfalls or > recommendations - BTW I have time not money so any pay solutions are > right out. > > Thanks > > -- > Vale, > Rob > > Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. > Sanam formam viatae conservate! > > http://www.rohanclan.com > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re:Page Cache..
"Caution: There is no true way of completely diabling the back button" With the short answer out of the way, here's some _javascript_ that will make it harder for folks to move backwards on your page. Step one: Open the first page of the application in a new window. Use this script as an example of preventing the back button from appearing in the window Step two: Disable the right clicker using this script from Dynamic Drive. Please note that it only works in IE consistantly
Jeremy Brodie Edgewater Technology web: http://www.edgewater.com phone:(703) 815-2500 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Hi there: >I'd like to avoid back button in the IE...I have a wizard with 3 pages..If u >click on the button Step 2 u are not allowed to go back to the page 1. I >used CFcache tag with timestamp="0" but it doesn't work..any idea? > >regards >__ >MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez >Microsoft Certified System Engineer. >DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo >COPEXTEL, S.A. > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
On Monday 09 Feb 2004 16:24 pm, Michael Dinowitz wrote: > No. Bottom line here is just no. There is no generic way of getting content > off a web page without getting the non-content (nav, etc.). Though there a Perl modules that have a fair go. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 08:33, Thomas Chiverton wrote: > On Monday 09 Feb 2004 16:24 pm, Michael Dinowitz wrote: > > No. Bottom line here is just no. There is no generic way of getting content > > off a web page without getting the non-content (nav, etc.). > > Though there a Perl modules that have a fair go. What are the Perl modules called? perhaps I can port them - do you have a link? -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Page Cache..
Thanks Jeremy..good idea to open the wizard in another window Regards __ MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez Microsoft Certified System Engineer. DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo COPEXTEL, S.A. _ From: Jeremy Brodie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:33 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re:Page Cache.. "Caution: There is no true way of completely diabling the back button" With the short answer out of the way, here's some _javascript_ that will make it harder for folks to move backwards on your page. Step one: Open the first page of the application in a new window. Use this script as an example of preventing the back button from appearing in the window Step two: Disable the right clicker using this script from Dynamic Drive. Please note that it only works in IE consistantly Jeremy Brodie Edgewater Technology web: http://www.edgewater.com phone:(703) 815-2500 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Hi there: >I'd like to avoid back button in the IE...I have a wizard with 3 pages..If u >click on the button Step 2 u are not allowed to go back to the page 1. I >used CFcache tag with timestamp="0" but it doesn't work..any idea? > >regards >__ >MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez >Microsoft Certified System Engineer. >DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo >COPEXTEL, S.A. > > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Mailto with an embedded form?
A client wants us to use the mailto: protocol of an anchor tag to open an email with an HTML form embedded in it. something like so: action='' method='post'>Comments: name='comment'>">Email Me However, when I try this out the body is put into the email as code - not rendered as a form. I'm trying to tell the client this isn't a desirable solution, but want to cover my butt. Is there a way to make this happen using an anchor tag and the mailto: protocol. I know I can do this with CFMAIL, but for this project we have to allow use of the native email client for creating the email. (simplest way to give the user access to their address book). Thanks in advance. Shawn [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
[OT] SSL Certificate Source
For one reason or another I choose not to do business with Verisign. I just found out Thawte is associated with Verisign. I am now wondering what independent Certificate authorities are left that are unassociated with Verisign. Anybody feel the same and been through this already? Thanks. -Nate [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: [OT] SSL Certificate Source
Geo-Trust -Original Message- From: Nathan C. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:00 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: [OT] SSL Certificate Source For one reason or another I choose not to do business with Verisign. I just found out Thawte is associated with Verisign. I am now wondering what independent Certificate authorities are left that are unassociated with Verisign. Anybody feel the same and been through this already? Thanks. -Nate _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
My only recommendation would be difficult. You would have to build your own application for comparison of code and strip out everything that is similar (you would have to decide on the rules). This is of course no easy task and I would probably not tackle something like that in coldfusion. As far as web languages are concerned perl is probably the best bet but in reality I would write a separate application to do this sort of thing. Tyler Clendenin GSL Solutions - Original Message - From: Rob Rohan To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:17 AM Subject: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page Hey there hi there ho there, I was wondering what others have used to strip the content out of web pages? I am working on a system that collects pages and archives them; however, only the content needs to be stored (i.e. not the navigation, images, extra page fodder). The sites it is archiving are vast so it would have to rather generic solution. I have seen this kind of thing before, but only for single specific sites. Does anyone know a good method to do it generically? I was leaning toward one of these but I am open to whatever * run the collected html through tidy (or jtidy) then (somehow) use xslt * (somehow) use a regular _expression_ on the collected html if anyone has done this before please let me know of pitfalls or recommendations - BTW I have time not money so any pay solutions are right out. Thanks -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Page Cache..
Jeremy Brodie wrote: > "Caution: There is no true way of completely diabling the back button" > ... Having read the caution, I should still point out that the user can always go back via "Alt + Left Arrow." Also, you should carefully consider "disabling" the back button. It tends to be a user-interface (usability) no-no. People have come to recognize, expect, and rely on the back button as a vehicle for navigating through a series of web pages. Disabling it removes a commonly expected tool from the user's browsing arsenal. Better you should code to accept and support the back button. -- Mosh Teitelbaum evoch, LLC Tel: (301) 942-5378 Fax: (301) 933-3651 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.evoch.com/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Page Cache..
You could use the replace function in JS to go from form to form thus disabling the ability for them to be able to go back if they do find a way after disabling everything. replace Method The replace method replaces the current History entry with the specified URL. After calling the replace method, you cannot navigate back to the previous URL using the browser's Back button. Syntax: location.replace(URL) My favorite JS Reference: http://www.devguru.com/Technologies/ecmascript/quickref/_javascript__index.html Tyler Clendenin GSL Solutions - Original Message - From: Hassan Arteaga Rodriguez To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:46 AM Subject: RE: Page Cache.. Thanks Jeremy..good idea to open the wizard in another window Regards __ MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez Microsoft Certified System Engineer. DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo COPEXTEL, S.A. _ From: Jeremy Brodie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:33 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re:Page Cache.. "Caution: There is no true way of completely diabling the back button" With the short answer out of the way, here's some _javascript_ that will make it harder for folks to move backwards on your page. Step one: Open the first page of the application in a new window. Use this script as an example of preventing the back button from appearing in the window Step two: Disable the right clicker using this script from Dynamic Drive. Please note that it only works in IE consistantly Jeremy Brodie Edgewater Technology web: http://www.edgewater.com phone:(703) 815-2500 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Hi there: >I'd like to avoid back button in the IE...I have a wizard with 3 pages..If u >click on the button Step 2 u are not allowed to go back to the page 1. I >used CFcache tag with timestamp="0" but it doesn't work..any idea? > >regards >__ >MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez >Microsoft Certified System Engineer. >DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo >COPEXTEL, S.A. > > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Page Cache..
Another idea would be to put the three pages in your form onto one page as
hidden divs (except the first - that one should be visible). Then provide a
way to move between the pages (next/back links that would hide/show the
appropriate divs). And a Finish link/button that submitts the form.
Doing it this way will only put the main form on the history - hitting back
takes you to the page you were on before going to the form.
Another method is to make use of a hidden IFrame. Submit your form into an
iframe. Do whatever processing you need in the IFrame, then use _javascript_
to change the parent page with a
"window.parent.document.location.replace("page2.cfm");
Using the replace will prevent the back button from loading the first page
of the form.
There's always a way to work around the back button limitations...
Shawn
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Brodie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 8:33 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re:Page Cache..
"Caution: There is no true way of completely diabling the back button"
With the short answer out of the way, here's some _javascript_ that will make
it harder for folks to move backwards on your page.
Step one: Open the first page of the application in a new window. Use this
script as an example of preventing the back button from appearing in the
window
Step two: Disable the right clicker using this script from Dynamic Drive.
Please note that it only works in IE consistantly
Jeremy Brodie
Edgewater Technology
web: http://www.edgewater.com
phone:(703) 815-2500
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Hi there:
>I'd like to avoid back button in the IE...I have a wizard with 3 pages..If
u
>click on the button Step 2 u are not allowed to go back to the page 1. I
>used CFcache tag with timestamp="0" but it doesn't work..any idea?
>
>regards
>__
>MSc. Hassan Arteaga Rodríguez
>Microsoft Certified System Engineer.
>DIGI- Grupo de Desarrollo
>COPEXTEL, S.A.
>
>
_
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
RE: (Admin) Enough weekend fun
Sorry, just saw this...will pipe it. -S _ From: Haggerty, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: (Admin) Enough weekend fun I agree. When Angus McFee comes out of the woodwork, that is generally a signal that it is time to stop a particular discussion. M -Original Message- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:36 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: (Admin) Enough weekend fun Over the weekend the list rules about technical debates tend to be looser (re: the latest MM Mach-II thread). As it is no longer the weekend, lets please end this thread and move on to technical questions and answers. Thank you _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
Comments inline... _ From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:57 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II I understand the tradeoff. I'm just saying that MM is big enough with enough money and skilled programmers to write some of the tightest, fastest, most optimized code around if they wanted to. [Stacy Young] No matter how big the company I don't believe it's every justified to throw away money when you don't have to...and given your line of reasoning they might as well throw out Java and re-write at a lower level for a more "optimized" solution! The extra few dollars to make the code 'fast but inflexibility' (it really isn't inflexible, it's just specific to the needs of the MM site) is worth it to avoid what started this entire thread. [Stacy Young] 99.9% of the world doesn't give a hoot about this topic. The handful that do are most likely limited to this thread and/or avid readers of Seans blog cause it's not published anywhere else to any great extent. To have anyone see an error on a website, let alone for there to be an error in the first place is just not acceptable (in my mind when thinking of a multi-million dollar internet software company). [Stacy Young] I agree...as I'm sure most folks would that were involved with building the site/application. I'm sure it will be addressed. AVIS IMPORTANT: --- Les informations contenues dans le present document et ses pieces jointes sont strictement confidentielles et reservees a l'usage de la (des) personne(s) a qui il est adresse. Si vous n'etes pas le destinataire, soyez avise que toute divulgation, distribution, copie, ou autre utilisation de ces informations est strictement prohibee. Si vous avez recu ce document par erreur, veuillez s'il vous plait communiquer immediatement avec l'expediteur et detruire ce document sans en faire de copie sous quelque forme. WARNING: --- The information contained in this document and attachments is confidential and intended only for the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any other use of the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this document by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this document and attachments without making any copy of any kind. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 09:06, Tyler Clendenin wrote: >My only recommendation would be difficult. >You would have to build your own application for comparison of code and >strip out everything that is similar (you would have to decide on the >rules). Comparison of code? Meaning look at what a typical anchor tag looks like, typical _javascript_, etc? Ah, so you are suggesting *removing* what is bad not getting what is good... interesting... I'll muddle that one over - thanks Tyler -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Security Issue?
We've discovered that if go to our website, and remove the "cfmx" context root from the URL, you can see the Cold Fusion code behind the website. I'm guessing that this is probably due to a configuration error somewhere in our system. I'm not sure how much of a security risk this is since we send no information in the clear and all of our database interactions are done through stored procedures, but it's still obviously something I'd like to take care of. We're using Cold Fuxion MX (pre 6.1, but with latest patches applied) JRun 4 (latest patches applied) Apache 2.0.44 Solaris 9 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Security Issue?
http://www.domain.com/test.cfm?tony=1 what cfmx context are you talking about? tony r e v o l u t i o n w e b d e s i g n [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.revolutionwebdesign.com its only looks good to those who can see bad as well -anonymous -Original Message- From: Richard Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:28 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Security Issue? We've discovered that if go to our website, and remove the "cfmx" context root from the URL, you can see the Cold Fusion code behind the website. I'm guessing that this is probably due to a configuration error somewhere in our system. I'm not sure how much of a security risk this is since we send no information in the clear and all of our database interactions are done through stored procedures, but it's still obviously something I'd like to take care of. We're using Cold Fuxion MX (pre 6.1, but with latest patches applied) JRun 4 (latest patches applied) Apache 2.0.44 Solaris 9 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Security Issue?
Tony Weeg wrote: > http://www.domain.com/test.cfm?tony=1 > > what cfmx context are you talking about? In our setup, the URL looks like this: http://www.our-domain.edu/cfmx/site/index.cfm When users go to www.out-domain.edu, they are automatically redirected to the site as written above. Does that make sense? [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Security Issue?
This is a guess, but ... If the default context (/) maps to \jrun\servers\default, and /cfmx maps to \jrun\servers\default\cf, and CF is not installed in the default context, then yes, any files requested from url/cf/ would indeed return the files without CF processing them. In such a setup if you request the file as url/cfmx then CF will process the request, but a request via url/cf would not be processed by CF. --- Ben -Original Message- From: Richard Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:28 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Security Issue? We've discovered that if go to our website, and remove the "cfmx" context root from the URL, you can see the Cold Fusion code behind the website. I'm guessing that this is probably due to a configuration error somewhere in our system. I'm not sure how much of a security risk this is since we send no information in the clear and all of our database interactions are done through stored procedures, but it's still obviously something I'd like to take care of. We're using Cold Fuxion MX (pre 6.1, but with latest patches applied) JRun 4 (latest patches applied) Apache 2.0.44 Solaris 9 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re:Client vars won't go into the db....?
Nope, trusted cache is not set. Thanks, Evan >Hmm, nother long shot. Do you have the trusted cache set to yes? It migth >be remembering an old setting? > >DRE > >-Original Message- >From: Evan Lavidor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 11:45 AM >To: CF-Talk >Subject: Re:Client vars won't go into the db? > > >Yep. I'm sure that there's only one application.cfm, and that the > tag is not specifying a location with the "clientstorage" >parameter. > >I also have a DSN specified as the default storage location for client vars >in CF admin. > >Yet, I'm still seeing client vars show up under >HKLM\Software\Allaire\CurrentVersion\Clients. > >Any ideas are much apprecaited. > >Thanks, > >Evan > >>Are you absolutely sure you have only one application.cfm? >>DRE >> >>-Original Message- >>From: Evan Lavidor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 9:16 AM >>To: CF-Talk >>Subject: Re:Client vars won't go into the db? >> >> >>...and a as followup, client variables on our MX servers are also showing >up >>in the registry, even though we've got the settings in CF Admin specifying >>the default location being a datasource. >> >>Any help is greatly appreciated. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Evan >> _ >> >> > _ > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
OT: Just slightly
I had to share a very impressive Flash/CF site at http://www.rr.com/flash/index.cfm. I think this is the best RIA type Flash site that I have seen. And it looks like they're using CF on the backend. This is defenitely for broadband users (Time Warner cable's RoadRunner service) so I probably wouldn't try it on a dail-up. Play around with it a little and check out the in-line video, very nice! What do you guys think... [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
CFCookie & IE 6
I have an application that sets 3 cookies using cfcookie using the following syntaxThe syntax is the same for all 3 cookies except for the fact that they have different names. I'm using _javascript_ to redirect the user to the members area once they pass authentication so the cookies are getting set properly and are defined on the users' pc but every once in a while one of the cookie's values gets scrambled and is unable to be read. This appears to only happen on IE6. Any thoughts? ~jason [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Just slightly
The link returns a Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, [EMAIL PROTECTED] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. == Stop spam on your domain, Anti-spam solutions http://www.clickdoug.com/mailfilter.cfm For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com == Aspire to Inspire before you Retire or Expire! - Original Message - From: Andrew Spear To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:17 AM Subject: OT: Just slightly I had to share a very impressive Flash/CF site at http://www.rr.com/flash/index.cfm. I think this is the best RIA type Flash site that I have seen. And it looks like they're using CF on the backend. This is defenitely for broadband users (Time Warner cable's RoadRunner service) so I probably wouldn't try it on a dail-up. Play around with it a little and check out the in-line video, very nice! What do you guys think... [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Just slightly
On Feb 9, 2004, at 1:26 PM, Doug White wrote: > The link returns a > Internal Server Error Get rid of the trailing dot from the URL. Worked for me. Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
so that's why people keep yelling at me when I go out. All this time I thought I had a headlight out. ~Simon Simon Horwith CTO, Etrilogy Ltd. Member of Team Macromedia Macromedia Certified Instructor Certified Advanced ColdFusion MX Developer Certified Flash MX Developer CFDJList - List Administrator http://www.how2cf.com/ -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 February 2004 14:33 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II > > I hear this "secret sauce" argument all the time and > > frankly think it is without merit. I have never walked > > into an organization and had trouble hitting the ground > > running because I had never seen the methodology, > > framework, or style in use at that organization. > > [stacy] There's a big difference between you and an average > developer getting up to speed on grunt work in a web app > though. ;) It's been my experience that most average, competent developers have no trouble with those issues either, just as American visitors to England have little trouble remembering to drive on the other side of the road. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page
Rob, I just went through this situation while building my new webmail app. And I have to agree with the others... It's not an easy thing to strip html and just leave the content. I had to use several different functions to get the job done: 1) Replace all BR and P tags with CR/LF's (thanks to Ben Forta for his ParagraphFormat2 UDF!) 2) Strip all scripts, applets and objects. 3) Strip all HTML tags. The most important thing I learned from all of this is that most situations are unique. Depending on your application, you will need to strip specific portions of a page. You said that you need a generic solution, but I don't think that is possible. The best solution for you would probably be to develop maps for each site. 1) Examine a site and and create a set of regex's that, when run in order, will give you the result you want. 2) Store the maps in a file or db table. 3) Run a query to get the map for the site. 4) Do a CFHTTP to get the initial content 5) Loop through the map query and do REREPLACE's on the content. 6) Save the result HTH -- Michael Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 9:21 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFMX - best way to strip content from html page On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 09:06, Tyler Clendenin wrote: >My only recommendation would be difficult. >You would have to build your own application for comparison of code and >strip out everything that is similar (you would have to decide on the >rules). Comparison of code? Meaning look at what a typical anchor tag looks like, typical _javascript_, etc? Ah, so you are suggesting *removing* what is bad not getting what is good... interesting... I'll muddle that one over - thanks Tyler -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT: Just slightly
That site is awesome - if only I had time / warrener budget ;) On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 09:17, Andrew Spear wrote: > I had to share a very impressive Flash/CF site at http://www.rr.com/flash/index.cfm. I think this is the best RIA type Flash site that I have seen. And it looks like they're using CF on the backend. This is defenitely for broadband users (Time Warner cable's RoadRunner service) so I probably wouldn't try it on a dail-up. Play around with it a little and check out the in-line video, very nice! What do you guys think... > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
SSL redirect
We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the client does not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, but I am trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to the https by default without going into a loop. Thanks! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Select Field Values
Here's a rudimentary little question, but one that I go back and forth on: Say you have a dynamically driven select box: What's your favorite fruit? [select name = "fruit"] -Apples [value = 1] -Oranges [value = 2] -Other -Not Applicable [value = NULL] (Feel free to take issue with any of the following:) I'd assign the "Not Applicable" option a value of NULL in the DB field, so it would have neither a foreign key nor lookup value. However... 1. Generally, should the "other" option be in the database (as a field in the lookup table)? 2. Or alternatively, should the "other" option be a static one (if so, how is it best represented in the DB)? Thanks, Jamie [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Mailto with an embedded form?
In order to get it parsed as HTML by the mail client, you need to pass some extra headers, etc. I'm fairly certain this is not possible in the context of a mailto. Besides, you're already pushing the mailto to the point of failure. However, in your (probably simplified) example, I can't see why the user would need to access the address book, since [EMAIL PROTECTED] is hardcoded anyway. Can you explain that requirement? Jamie On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:58:28 -0700, in cf-talk you wrote: >A client wants us to use the mailto: protocol of an anchor tag to open an >email with an HTML form embedded in it. something like so: > > >action='' method='post'>Comments: >name='comment'>">Email Me > >However, when I try this out the body is put into the email as code - not >rendered as a form. I'm trying to tell the client this isn't a desirable >solution, but want to cover my butt. Is there a way to make this happen >using an anchor tag and the mailto: protocol. > >I know I can do this with CFMAIL, but for this project we have to allow use >of the native email client for creating the email. (simplest way to give the >user access to their address book). > >Thanks in advance. > >Shawn > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: [OT] SSL Certificate Source
Tucows.com allows you to resell certificates. Not sure if you can just buy one or not. John -Original Message- From: Nathan C. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:00 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: [OT] SSL Certificate Source For one reason or another I choose not to do business with Verisign. I just found out Thawte is associated with Verisign. I am now wondering what independent Certificate authorities are left that are unassociated with Verisign. Anybody feel the same and been through this already? Thanks. -Nate [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: SSL redirect
url="" /> > -Original Message- > From: stas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: SSL redirect > > We have a username/password form fields on the home page and > the client does > not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL > running, but I am > trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to > the https by > default without going into a loop. > > Thanks! > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Mailto with an embedded form?
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:05:17 -0500, in cf-talk I wrote: >In order to get it parsed as HTML by the mail client, you need to pass >some extra headers, etc. I'm fairly certain this is not possible in >the context of a mailto. Besides, you're already pushing the mailto to >the point of failure. I was technically wrong about the custom headers in an href mailto; however, I don't know how cross browser some of this stuff is. I'm still not necessarily advocating this, BTW. http://email.about.com/library/weekly/aa062199b.htm Jamie [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: SSL redirect
You should be able to leave the form page non-ssl and just post the form to https. Improves performance/speed on the homepage without comprimising security. -Cameron - Cameron Childress Sumo Consulting Inc --- land: 858.509.3098 cell: 678.637.5072 aim: cameroncf email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: stas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: SSL redirect We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the client does not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, but I am trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to the https by default without going into a loop. Thanks! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Select Field Values
In order to create enforceable referential integrity, I'd give both "Other" and "Not Applicable" a value and record in the fruit lookup table. -Cameron - Cameron Childress Sumo Consulting Inc --- land: 858.509.3098 cell: 678.637.5072 aim: cameroncf email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Jamie Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Select Field Values Here's a rudimentary little question, but one that I go back and forth on: Say you have a dynamically driven select box: What's your favorite fruit? [select name = "fruit"] -Apples [value = 1] -Oranges [value = 2] -Other -Not Applicable [value = NULL] (Feel free to take issue with any of the following:) I'd assign the "Not Applicable" option a value of NULL in the DB field, so it would have neither a foreign key nor lookup value. However... 1. Generally, should the "other" option be in the database (as a field in the lookup table)? 2. Or alternatively, should the "other" option be a static one (if so, how is it best represented in the DB)? Thanks, Jamie [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Select Field Values
I never use the "not applicable" in the database unless it's a "meaningful" value to the application. In other words, if the select box is optional and the client doesn't want to make sure that they explicitly said, "no value" then it doesn't need to be stored in the database. Otherwise, I use null, as you do. As for the "other" fields, I usually handle those in the join table if it's a many to many situation, such that you'd have a join table like so: userid number, fruitid number other varchar2 Or, if it's a "select one" I'd handle it in the main table: userid number fruitid number otherfruit varchar2 Not sure if this is "correct" but it works for me. - Original Message - From: "Jamie Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:55 PM Subject: Select Field Values > Here's a rudimentary little question, but one that I go back and forth > on: > > Say you have a dynamically driven select box: > > What's your favorite fruit? [select name = "fruit"] > -Apples [value = 1] > -Oranges [value = 2] > -Other > -Not Applicable [value = NULL] > > (Feel free to take issue with any of the following:) > > I'd assign the "Not Applicable" option a value of NULL in the DB > field, so it would have neither a foreign key nor lookup value. > > However... > 1. Generally, should the "other" option be in the database (as a field > in the lookup table)? > 2. Or alternatively, should the "other" option be a static one (if so, > how is it best represented in the DB)? > > Thanks, > Jamie > > > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: SSL redirect
Cameron, So, if you post from non-ssl to ssl, the posted data is still secure? -Deanna (who will be dealing with this same issue, shortly) - Original Message - From: "Cameron Childress" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:29 PM Subject: RE: SSL redirect > You should be able to leave the form page non-ssl and just post the form to > https. Improves performance/speed on the homepage without comprimising > security. > > -Cameron > > - > Cameron Childress > Sumo Consulting Inc > --- > land: 858.509.3098 > cell: 678.637.5072 > aim: cameroncf > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -Original Message- > From: stas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: SSL redirect > > > We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the client does > not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, but I am > trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to the https by > default without going into a loop. > > Thanks! > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: SSL redirect
You can display the form itself using HTTP, but post the form to https://myformhandler.cfm and the password will be encrypted. Keep in mind that if you redirect the home page itself to HTTPS, or otherwise start serving pages using HTTPS://, and if you use addresses without specifying the protocol (e.g. "/mydir/mypag.cfm") the visitor will continue browsing using HTTPS. On a busy server, serving non-sensitive information on a secure connection may impose unnecessary overhead for the page encryption. - Original Message - From: "stas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:48 AM Subject: SSL redirect > We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the client does > not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, but I am > trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to the https by > default without going into a loop. > > Thanks! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: SSL redirect
Yes. However, end users don't normally know this. So, most sites will have the entry form ssl'd as well. - Original Message - From: Deanna Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, February 9, 2004 12:39 pm Subject: Re: SSL redirect > Cameron, > So, if you post from non-ssl to ssl, the posted data is still secure? > > -Deanna (who will be dealing with this same issue, shortly) > > - Original Message - > From: "Cameron Childress" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:29 PM > Subject: RE: SSL redirect > > > > You should be able to leave the form page non-ssl and just post > the form > to > > https. Improves performance/speed on the homepage without > comprimising> security. > > > > -Cameron > > > > - > > Cameron Childress > > Sumo Consulting Inc > > --- > > land: 858.509.3098 > > cell: 678.637.5072 > > aim: cameroncf > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -Original Message- > > From: stas [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: SSL redirect > > > > > > We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the > clientdoes > > not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, > but I am > > trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to > the https by > > default without going into a loop. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: SSL redirect
Good to know. We are just about to put all our LDAP-protected stuff on a secure server and will be writing lots of redirects to handle how it used to be dealt with. Thanks! -Deanna - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:37 PM Subject: Re: SSL redirect > Yes. > > However, end users don't normally know this. So, most sites will have the entry form ssl'd as well. > > - Original Message - > From: Deanna Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Monday, February 9, 2004 12:39 pm > Subject: Re: SSL redirect > > > Cameron, > > So, if you post from non-ssl to ssl, the posted data is still secure? > > > > -Deanna (who will be dealing with this same issue, shortly) > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Cameron Childress" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:29 PM > > Subject: RE: SSL redirect > > > > > > > You should be able to leave the form page non-ssl and just post > > the form > > to > > > https. Improves performance/speed on the homepage without > > comprimising> security. > > > > > > -Cameron > > > > > > - > > > Cameron Childress > > > Sumo Consulting Inc > > > --- > > > land: 858.509.3098 > > > cell: 678.637.5072 > > > aim: cameroncf > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: stas [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: SSL redirect > > > > > > > > > We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the > > clientdoes > > > not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, > > but I am > > > trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to > > the https by > > > default without going into a loop. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: [OT] SSL Certificate Source
InstantSSL.com Great support via phone (no experience with their email support) - and reasonable priced, especially if you become a reseller. I just signed up as a reseller, and I'm buying certs. Thanks, Mark _ From: Burns, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 2:08 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: [OT] SSL Certificate Source Tucows.com allows you to resell certificates. Not sure if you can just buy one or not. John -Original Message- From: Nathan C. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:00 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: [OT] SSL Certificate Source For one reason or another I choose not to do business with Verisign. I just found out Thawte is associated with Verisign. I am now wondering what independent Certificate authorities are left that are unassociated with Verisign. Anybody feel the same and been through this already? Thanks. -Nate _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re:Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
Hey, I've complained about the dbvarname attribute in the cfprocparam tag not working! :) I've also fixed it. heh. ;) I dunno, I think there's merit to the idea -- he's pointing to people who "like to complain" but don't like to try and do anything about the things they're complaining about even when they can. There are a lot of people like that in the world, many of them in any given programmers' community. I can't name any names in particular, most of the folks I deal with frequently are actively contributing in some way to solving problems, whether they copmlain about them or not. I guess CFC's could be a good example for myself - I've been fairly vocal about my distaste for the portability problems that come from using CFC's, but I've also developed code aimed at mitigating those problems. (They'll only be _eliminated_ by changes to the server.) But I think that a lot of people (if not the majority) looking at a similar problem are apt to begin with not using it and then maybe move to complaining about it because they'd like to use it but not actually contributing to any kind of solution to make it better. In some cases it's because people are lazy and in others it's because they don't know how to help, or just don't want to know how to help because they're lazy and knowing how involves work. Though the most vocal people tend to be those who actually contribute in my experience. >> For years, Fusebox has been criticized by those who stand at a >> distance and >> throw stones at it while refusing to contribute or become involved in >> improvements to it. With Mach-ii, Sean is standing up as an >> individual and >> taking a role in it's development, not sitting back and complaining >> endlessly without contributing anything to it. >> >I don't see the point here. Are you saying people can only complain >about something if they are willing to fix it? When was the last time >you complained about something in CFML? Did you fix it? I didn't think >so! > >Now it is one thing to complain always and offer no contributions, but >I don't see that here at all. I have heard before that Dave Watts and I >are considered by many to be anti-Fusebox. Do we not contribute to the >CFML community? Certainly I have complained about Fusebox, but have I >done so without contributing to the CFML community? I think not! And >for the record, I did submit at least a couple of bugs along with what >I thought the fixes should be to Sean in regard to MachII. > >> It's very apparent to me that Macromedia does not officially support >> Mach-ii. There will always be those who can't see that line, but >> then there >> are also those who don't understand alot of things. >> >And it is for that very reason Macromedia should have known better. > >-Matt > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: SSL redirect
Yes, though as someone else has pointed out, some users will not know this and may be wary of a login page without the little SSL enabled indicator in their browser. A good example of a site doing this is www.bankofamerica.com. If the login on their homepage required the entire homepage to be encrypted, hits to their homepage would require *much* more processing power to handle all the SSL traffic. Instead, they have opted to only provide encryption on the POST. -Cameron - Cameron Childress Sumo Consulting Inc --- land: 858.509.3098 cell: 678.637.5072 aim: cameroncf email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Deanna Schneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:40 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: SSL redirect Cameron, So, if you post from non-ssl to ssl, the posted data is still secure? -Deanna (who will be dealing with this same issue, shortly) - Original Message - From: "Cameron Childress" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:29 PM Subject: RE: SSL redirect > You should be able to leave the form page non-ssl and just post the form to > https. Improves performance/speed on the homepage without comprimising > security. > > -Cameron > > - > Cameron Childress > Sumo Consulting Inc > --- > land: 858.509.3098 > cell: 678.637.5072 > aim: cameroncf > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -Original Message- > From: stas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: SSL redirect > > > We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the client does > not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, but I am > trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to the https by > default without going into a loop. > > Thanks! > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: SSL redirect
But generally not if it's a login form embedded on the home page or in a side column. If you've got little username/password form that appears on every page you'd end up encrypting the entire site. For a dedicated login page it's a good idea, like you say, so that people know the login is secure. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:37 PM Subject: Re: SSL redirect > Yes. > > However, end users don't normally know this. So, most sites will have the entry form ssl'd as well. > > - Original Message - > From: Deanna Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Monday, February 9, 2004 12:39 pm > Subject: Re: SSL redirect > > > Cameron, > > So, if you post from non-ssl to ssl, the posted data is still secure? > > > > -Deanna (who will be dealing with this same issue, shortly) [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Co-Location ?
Dave watts wrote: >Yes, CFMX can legally be run on Windows Server 2003 Web Edition. MS SQL >Server can not. Dave, It was my understanding -- after going up a couple steps on the ladder with MS sales, and getting what I was told was an opinion from their legal dept -- that anything that extends the functionality of 2k3 server beyond that which is already provided is forbidden. Now, I've played the game with MS sales before (the front lines say no to everything that reduces sales) and as such took some time to try and get something resembling an authoritative opinion, which took several days and several phone calls. This was shortly after Win2k3 came out. The answer boiled down to this: if you use a product that provides the same function as something on the web edition does, but just does it better, then that is allowable. However if that 3rd-party product also extends the capabilities of the software to something not originally provided then that is forbidden. As such some things that CF does are OK, and some are considered in violation. I was also told that web hosts who go beyond the licensing in cases like this would very likely be just about last on the list of people MS will be going after for license violations. No explanation of that was given. Can you point to a published, official MS source, or someone In Charge who will go on record with a contrary position? It certainly would be a nice option, but I've been expressly told it doesn't exist. I haven't looked again since the above took place. Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Select Field Values
Based on the question I would assume that the other field has an accompanied input box. What I would do is use a NULL value for both "Other" and "NA". And the "Other" input can be used to distinguish that it is "Other" and not "NA". Tyler Clendenin GSL Solutions - Original Message - From: Jamie Jackson To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:55 PM Subject: Select Field Values Here's a rudimentary little question, but one that I go back and forth on: Say you have a dynamically driven select box: What's your favorite fruit? [select name = "fruit"] -Apples [value = 1] -Oranges [value = 2] -Other -Not Applicable [value = NULL] (Feel free to take issue with any of the following:) I'd assign the "Not Applicable" option a value of NULL in the DB field, so it would have neither a foreign key nor lookup value. However... 1. Generally, should the "other" option be in the database (as a field in the lookup table)? 2. Or alternatively, should the "other" option be a static one (if so, how is it best represented in the DB)? Thanks, Jamie [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Select Field Values
Hi Deanna, Actually, where to store the "otherFruit" field isn't the question, though I'd agree with your placement. Rather, the question is what goes in the database (i.e. the "fruit" field) if someone selects the "other" option (ignoring, for a moment, the implied "otherFruit" field). Is it simply a foreign key on the lookup table, which contains "Other" as a row? (It seems like this solution could potentially junk up lookup tables, but maybe that's what's called for?) Thanks, Jamie On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:38:34 -0600, in cf-talk you wrote: >I never use the "not applicable" in the database unless it's a "meaningful" >value to the application. In other words, if the select box is optional and >the client doesn't want to make sure that they explicitly said, "no value" >then it doesn't need to be stored in the database. Otherwise, I use null, as >you do. > >As for the "other" fields, I usually handle those in the join table if it's >a many to many situation, such that you'd have a join table like so: >userid number, >fruitid number >other varchar2 > >Or, if it's a "select one" I'd handle it in the main table: >userid number >fruitid number >otherfruit varchar2 > >Not sure if this is "correct" but it works for me. > > > > >- Original Message - >From: "Jamie Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:55 PM >Subject: Select Field Values > > >> Here's a rudimentary little question, but one that I go back and forth >> on: >> >> Say you have a dynamically driven select box: >> >> What's your favorite fruit? [select name = "fruit"] >> -Apples [value = 1] >> -Oranges [value = 2] >> -Other >> -Not Applicable [value = NULL] >> >> (Feel free to take issue with any of the following:) >> >> I'd assign the "Not Applicable" option a value of NULL in the DB >> field, so it would have neither a foreign key nor lookup value. >> >> However... >> 1. Generally, should the "other" option be in the database (as a field >> in the lookup table)? >> 2. Or alternatively, should the "other" option be a static one (if so, >> how is it best represented in the DB)? >> >> Thanks, >> Jamie >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Security Issue?
Ben Forta wrote: > This is a guess, but ... > > If the default context (/) maps to \jrun\servers\default, and /cfmx maps > to \jrun\servers\default\cf, and CF is not installed in the default > context, then yes, any files requested from url/cf/ would indeed return > the files without CF processing them. In such a setup if you request the > file as url/cfmx then CF will process the request, but a request via > url/cf would not be processed by CF. You're right about that, as far as I can tell. We're coming to terms with the fact that we're going to have to revamp our server's architecture. The individual who installed JRun and Cold Fusion in the first place installed everything, including all of our website files, under the cfusion directory, which will complicate upgrading Cold Fusion. We're also having our context root issues, as well as the fact that we use a lot of Perl CGI on our site as well -- which must be referred to with the direct URL without the cfmx context root (if the context root is included in the URL, the Perl script won't execute). [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
I have a friend who, for some unknown reason, wants to learn CF :). Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion book for someone without any coding experience? Or perhaps a class in the San Francisco Area. I am pretty sure he knows HTML; it would be nice if the book covered MX too. I figure Ben Forta would have at least a couple (and amazon says he does), but I've never read any cold fusion books let alone a beginning one so I can't in good conscience recommend any. Any input is welcome Thanks -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Select Field Values
Hi Tyler, I had been considering this solution, but didn't mention in my post, out of fear that it would complicate the message. I'm beginning to lean toward this solution, especially since you offered it independently. It has the benefit of leaving my lookup tables clean. However, I had been hesitant to take some meaning out of the DB and put it into the app's business logic, but I guess that doesn't matter much. Thanks, Jamie On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:15:09 -0500, in cf-talk you wrote: >Based on the question I would assume that the other field has an accompanied input box. What I would do is use a NULL value for both "Other" and "NA". And the "Other" input can be used to distinguish that it is "Other" and not "NA". > >Tyler Clendenin >GSL Solutions > - Original Message - > From: Jamie Jackson > To: CF-Talk > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:55 PM > Subject: Select Field Values > > > Here's a rudimentary little question, but one that I go back and forth > on: > > Say you have a dynamically driven select box: > > What's your favorite fruit? [select name = "fruit"] > -Apples [value = 1] > -Oranges [value = 2] > -Other > -Not Applicable [value = NULL] > > (Feel free to take issue with any of the following:) > > I'd assign the "Not Applicable" option a value of NULL in the DB > field, so it would have neither a foreign key nor lookup value. > > However... > 1. Generally, should the "other" option be in the database (as a field > in the lookup table)? > 2. Or alternatively, should the "other" option be a static one (if so, > how is it best represented in the DB)? > > Thanks, > Jamie > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
>I have a friend who, for some unknown reason, wants to learn CF :). > >Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion book for >someone without any coding experience? Or perhaps a class in the San >Francisco Area. I am pretty sure he knows HTML; it would be nice if the >book covered MX too. > >I figure Ben Forta would have at least a couple (and amazon says he >does), but I've never read any cold fusion books let alone a beginning >one so I can't in good conscience recommend any. > >Any input is welcome > Have him read the Mach-II Development Guide and Sean Corfield's Coding Guidlines. :P Seriously though, I can't recommend enough the ColdFusion MX Bible by Churvis et al. From beginner to advanced, there's something in that book for everybody, and is a nice, methodical way to get into CF. The only caveat is that it's based on MX 6.0, and I think Rob Brooks-Bilson's book is the only 6.1 book on the market. However, the book is still highly accurate, and since your friend is a beginner, probably won't have to worry about the CFC hacks/fixes and stuff for a while!! There are a ton of other good books out there as well, but this one in particular has been an excellent read. Just my $.02. Regards, Dave. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
"Programming ColdFusion MX" by Rob Brooks-Bilson (O'Reilly Press). That's my favorite CF book these days, especially since it covers 6.1. However, I learned CF from Ben Forta, and some helpful colleagues at SBC many moons ago... Well before ParameterExists was deprecated :) ... and have enjoyed all his books' permutations. - Jim Rob Rohan wrote: > I have a friend who, for some unknown reason, wants to learn CF :). > > Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion book for > someone without any coding experience? Or perhaps a class in the San > Francisco Area. I am pretty sure he knows HTML; it would be nice if the > book covered MX too. > > I figure Ben Forta would have at least a couple (and amazon says he > does), but I've never read any cold fusion books let alone a beginning > one so I can't in good conscience recommend any. > > Any input is welcome > > Thanks > > -- > Vale, > Rob > > Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. > Sanam formam viatae conservate! > > http://www.rohanclan.com > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: SSL redirect
Thanks, Cameron - so if one were to use a protocol analyzer to read the post data, it'd be gibberish, right? - Original Message - From: Cameron Childress To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 2:29 PM Subject: RE: SSL redirect You should be able to leave the form page non-ssl and just post the form to https. Improves performance/speed on the homepage without comprimising security. -Cameron - Cameron Childress Sumo Consulting Inc --- land: 858.509.3098 cell: 678.637.5072 aim: cameroncf email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: stas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 10:48 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: SSL redirect We have a username/password form fields on the home page and the client does not want these to be sent in clear text. We do have SSL running, but I am trying to figure out how to tell the home page to redirect to the https by default without going into a loop. Thanks! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: SSL redirect
> Thanks, Cameron - so if one were to use a protocol analyzer > to read the post data, it'd be gibberish, right? Yes, that's correct. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Good beginner cold fusion book
> Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion book for > someone without any coding experience? I think in this case your best choice is this one: ColdFusion MX: From Static to Dynamic in 10 Steps by Barry Moore Paperback - 380 pages (August 2002) New Riders ISBN: 0735712964 You can move to Ben's book at a later stage. Anyway, be sure to check's Amazon reviews for additional opinions Massimo Foti http://www.massimocorner.com Co-Author of Dreamweaver MX 2004 Magic: http://www.dwmagic.com/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Mailto with an embedded form?
We present the user with a default list of TO addresses, based on the context of the "project" they are working on. However the email being sent may need to go to others not in the default list, or some on the list may not need to see the email. Basically, the user get's to decide who the email should go to. Thanks for the input though. Shawn -Original Message- From: Jamie Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Mailto with an embedded form? In order to get it parsed as HTML by the mail client, you need to pass some extra headers, etc. I'm fairly certain this is not possible in the context of a mailto. Besides, you're already pushing the mailto to the point of failure. However, in your (probably simplified) example, I can't see why the user would need to access the address book, since [EMAIL PROTECTED] is hardcoded anyway. Can you explain that requirement? Jamie On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:58:28 -0700, in cf-talk you wrote: >A client wants us to use the mailto: protocol of an anchor tag to open an >email with an HTML form embedded in it. something like so: > > >action='' method='post'>Comments: >name='comment'>">Email Me > >However, when I try this out the body is put into the email as code - not >rendered as a form. I'm trying to tell the client this isn't a desirable >solution, but want to cover my butt. Is there a way to make this happen >using an anchor tag and the mailto: protocol. > >I know I can do this with CFMAIL, but for this project we have to allow use >of the native email client for creating the email. (simplest way to give the >user access to their address book). > >Thanks in advance. > >Shawn > > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
The Forta one is quite good. I've had a gander through the latest editions and they've gotten much better over the years. - Original Message - From: Rob Rohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, February 9, 2004 1:27 pm Subject: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book > I have a friend who, for some unknown reason, wants to learn CF :). > > Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion > book for > someone without any coding experience? Or perhaps a class in the San > Francisco Area. I am pretty sure he knows HTML; it would be nice > if the > book covered MX too. > > I figure Ben Forta would have at least a couple (and amazon says he > does), but I've never read any cold fusion books let alone a beginning > one so I can't in good conscience recommend any. > > Any input is welcome > > Thanks > > -- > Vale, > Rob > > Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. > Sanam formam viatae conservate! > > http://www.rohanclan.com > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 12:35, Jim Campbell wrote: > "Programming ColdFusion MX" by Rob Brooks-Bilson (O'Reilly Press). > That's my favorite CF book these days, especially since it covers 6.1. Does that one cover the basics? I mean like "this is how cfif works" kind of stuff or is it geared toward higher level coders? That Bible one Dave recommeded sounds like it should start from the begining - but the 6.1 stuff would be nice too. Does "Programming ColdFusion MX" cover the basic basics? > However, I learned CF from Ben Forta, and some helpful colleagues at SBC > many moons ago... Well before ParameterExists was deprecated :) ... and I actually had a boss that would get mad at me for using isDefined instead of parameterexists hehehe -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Co-Location ?
As I said earlier I queried MS on this subject, but it was awhile ago. I just spent some time talking with a couple of MS sales support people and got a very different story. I called the 800 number on the web site this time. Formerly I got a negative from sales, and after that used a contact to refer me to someone in legal. First and foremost, I related what I had been told earlier and was told that "The legal people don't know what they're talking about when it comes to technical issues like this" and that they were dead wrong. Secondly, if you are delivering web-only apps you can run anything that will install on the server. Specifically the limitation is with Active Directory. If you need it, Web Edition has a very crippled version of it and chances are your app will not run. When I asked about ColdFusion, Imail and mySQL I was told, literally, "go right ahead". -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Co-Location ?
> It was my understanding -- after going up a couple steps > on the ladder with MS sales, and getting what I was told > was an opinion from their legal dept -- that anything > that extends the functionality of 2k3 server beyond that > which is already provided is forbidden. Now, I've played > the game with MS sales before (the front lines say no to > everything that reduces sales) and as such took some time > to try and get something resembling an authoritative > opinion, which took several days and several phone calls. > This was shortly after Win2k3 came out. > > The answer boiled down to this: if you use a product that > provides the same function as something on the web edition > does, but just does it better, then that is allowable. > However if that 3rd-party product also extends the > capabilities of the software to something not originally > provided then that is forbidden. As such some things that > CF does are OK, and some are considered in violation. > > I was also told that web hosts who go beyond the licensing > in cases like this would very likely be just about last on > the list of people MS will be going after for license > violations. No explanation of that was given. > > Can you point to a published, official MS source, or someone > In Charge who will go on record with a contrary position? It > certainly would be a nice option, but I've been expressly > told it doesn't exist. I haven't looked again since the above > took place. I wouldn't trust an MS sales guy as far as I can throw him. The only thing that matters, in my opinion, is what MS provides in written form: the product EULA, and their web site. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/web.mspx#usag e "Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, can be used solely to deploy Web pages, Web sites, Web applications, and Web services. Customers can use Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, to install the following: * Web server software; for example, IIS. * Web availability management software; for example, Microsoft Application Center. Installations of non-Web serving applications are prohibited. ASP.NET-based applications that include code written in third-party programming languages can include that programming language's runtime components. For non-Web serving applications, you should consider Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition." http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/priclicfaq.msp x#web "Q. What applications are restricted from running on Windows Server 2003, Web Edition? A. Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, is designed specifically for dedicated Web serving needs, and its functionality has certain limitations as follows: * Organizations cannot use Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, to deploy enterprise Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration (UDDI) services. UDDI is an essential component for enabling discovery and reuse of XML Web services. * Although computers running Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, can be members of an Active Directory® service domain, Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, cannot be a domain controller. Consequently, organizations cannot use Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, alone to apply certain management features, including Group Policy, Software Restriction Policies, Remote Installation Services, Microsoft Metadirectory Services, Internet Authentication Service, and others. * As of August 2003, all versions of Outlook Web Access (OWA) and Microsoft Exchange Server will not install on Windows Server 2003, Web Edition. * Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, is not licensed for use as an enterprise database server. Database server software such as Microsoft SQL Server(tm) and other non-MSDE-based databases are not supported and may not run on Windows Server 2003, Web Edition." In any case, I have serious doubts about MS's ability to control what third-party products you can install on the OS you've licensed. Their legal department can say all it wants about it, but just imagine the logical end result - MS could prevent you from installing ANY third-party software they didn't want you to use. "Windows Server 2004 Oracle- and Java-free Edition", anyone? Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: CFMX + SQL Server in windows only security mode
> If you are using Windows mode - you need to have a user > account set up on the server. Then add this account to > the SQL database. This won't work with the MS SQL Server JDBC driver that comes with CFMX. It will only work if you use an ODBC Socket connection, which isn't generally recommended for performance reasons. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Good beginner cold fusion book
> Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold > fusion book for someone without any coding experience? I realize this may seem kind of silly, but your friend might consider learning a general-purpose programming language first. There are plenty of books aimed at this market; many of them are quite good. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
Sure. It starts from the absolute basics (like how to write CF Comments, what the # marks do, etc.) and moves into plenty of complex subjects like UDFs, CFCs, remoting, et. al, and has a solid function/tag reference in the back. YMMV, but I like it. And, since it's an O'Reilly book, it has a cool animal on the cover (colophon says it's a tern. I thought it was a booby - regardless, plenty of pun potential). :) - Jim Rob Rohan wrote: > On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 12:35, Jim Campbell wrote: > > "Programming ColdFusion MX" by Rob Brooks-Bilson (O'Reilly Press). > > That's my favorite CF book these days, especially since it covers 6.1. > > Does that one cover the basics? I mean like "this is how cfif works" kind > of stuff or is it geared toward higher level coders? That Bible one Dave > recommeded sounds like it should start from the begining - but the 6.1 > stuff would be nice too. Does "Programming ColdFusion MX" cover the basic > basics? > > > However, I learned CF from Ben Forta, and some helpful colleagues at > SBC > > many moons ago... Well before ParameterExists was deprecated :) ... and > I actually had a boss that would get mad at me for using isDefined > instead of parameterexists hehehe > > -- > Vale, > Rob > > Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. > Sanam formam viatae conservate! > > http://www.rohanclan.com > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Co-Location ?
- Original Message - From: "Matt Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:49 PM Subject: RE: Co-Location ? > As I said earlier I queried MS on this subject, but it was awhile ago. I just spent some time talking with a couple of MS sales support people and got a very different story. I called the 800 number on the web site this time. Formerly I got a negative from sales, and after that used a contact to refer me to someone in legal. > > First and foremost, I related what I had been told earlier and was told that "The legal people don't know what they're talking about when it comes to technical issues like this" and that they were dead wrong. > > Secondly, if you are delivering web-only apps you can run anything that will install on the server. Specifically the limitation is with Active Directory. If you need it, Web Edition has a very crippled version of it and chances are your app will not run. > > When I asked about ColdFusion, Imail and mySQL I was told, literally, "go right ahead". After your last post, I found the following page: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/web.mspx -- Quote - Usage Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, can be used solely to deploy Web pages, Web sites, Web applications, and Web services. Customers can use Windows Server 2003, Web Edition, to install the following: - Web server software; for example, IIS. - Web availability management software; for example, Microsoft Application Center. Installations of non-Web serving applications are prohibited. ASP.NET-based applications that include code written in third-party programming languages can include that programming language's runtime components. For non-Web serving applications, you should consider Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition. -- End quote - This suggests that installing, for instance, a third-party email or FTP server is prohibited. Same would be true for MySQL. But I'd sure like to hear their definition of "non-Web serving applications". Of course, what's written on a MS web page isn't legally binding, nor does it necessarily even reflect the intention of the license. I honestly don't think Microsoft itself really has a firm grasp on either the legal aspects of their own licensing, nor the intention of many of their licensing schemes. As with many Microsoft licensing issues, all you need to do is keep asking different MS personnel until you get the answer you want. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Good beginner cold fusion book
On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 13:11, Dave Watts wrote: > > Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold > > fusion book for someone without any coding experience? > > I realize this may seem kind of silly, but your friend might consider > learning a general-purpose programming language first. There are plenty of > books aimed at this market; many of them are quite good. Which language would you recommend? I don't think that is silly, I knew C++ and java before I started messing with CF and found cf very easy to pickup due to the prior knowledge. I don't think I could recommend he learn C++ though hehehe - plus I think he wants to learn cf specifically. -- Vale, Rob Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. Sanam formam viatae conservate! http://www.rohanclan.com http://treebeard.sourceforge.net http://ashpool.sourceforge.net [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: OT: Good beginner cold fusion book
From my experience most tech books fall into one of two camps, tutorial or reference. I usually end up buying the tutorial first and then the reference close behind. There are some books that form the gray area in the middle, like Forta's excellent two ColdFusion books. They have a lot of tutorial, but there's a great tag/function reference in the back. However, lately I've been using "ColdFusionMX Bible" (ISBN 0764546228) for the tutorial and "Programming ColdFusion MX" (ISBN 0596003803) for the reference. I can't see me doing good coding without both sides of the coin (unless you've a photographic memory and can speed read. Then you just need to spend a Saturday in your local book store's computer section...). -- Howard Fore, [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew." Abraham Lincoln On Feb 9, 2004, at 3:27 PM, Rob Rohan wrote: > I have a friend who, for some unknown reason, wants to learn CF :). > > Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion book for > someone without any coding experience? Or perhaps a class in the San > Francisco Area. I am pretty sure he knows HTML; it would be nice if the > book covered MX too. > > I figure Ben Forta would have at least a couple (and amazon says he > does), but I've never read any cold fusion books let alone a beginning > one so I can't in good conscience recommend any. > > Any input is welcome > > Thanks > > -- > Vale, > Rob > > Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. > Sanam formam viatae conservate! > > http://www.rohanclan.com > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Good beginner cold fusion book
I reviewed ColdFusion MX: From Static to Dynamic in 10 Steps in the latest issue of FA and if you just want the core material, I highly recommend it. http://www.fusionauthority.com/alert/index.cfm?alertid=133#review2 There are a number of other high quality books from Ben, Raymond, Rob, Adam Churvis and others. I'd suggest that your friend get at least 2 books as different authors present the same information in different ways and actually looking at how they do it is very useful. > I have a friend who, for some unknown reason, wants to learn CF :). > > Anybody have a recommendation for a good beginning cold fusion book for > someone without any coding experience? Or perhaps a class in the San > Francisco Area. I am pretty sure he knows HTML; it would be nice if the > book covered MX too. > > I figure Ben Forta would have at least a couple (and amazon says he > does), but I've never read any cold fusion books let alone a beginning > one so I can't in good conscience recommend any. > > Any input is welcome > > Thanks > > -- > Vale, > Rob > > Luxuria immodica insaniam creat. > Sanam formam viatae conservate! > > http://www.rohanclan.com > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Good beginner cold fusion book
> Which language would you recommend? I don't think that is > silly, I knew C++ and java before I started messing with > CF and found cf very easy to pickup due to the prior knowledge. I would go with either Python or C#, I think - both are good introductory programming languages, there are very good primers for each, and you don't have to go out and buy anything to get started. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
