Comments for Rediscoverer http://rediscoverer.net ... since almost everything is already out there. Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:20:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 Comment on Input Elements: disabled vs. readOnly by OldSchoolBBSer http://rediscoverer.net/archives/32/comment-page-1#comment-10603 OldSchoolBBSer Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:20:22 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/32#comment-10603 well crap... looks like it yanked my examples since they were html code. sorry bout that. well crap… looks like it yanked my examples since they were html code. sorry bout that.

]]> Comment on Input Elements: disabled vs. readOnly by OldSchoolBBSer http://rediscoverer.net/archives/32/comment-page-1#comment-10602 OldSchoolBBSer Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:18:04 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/32#comment-10602 Lol. Working with it right now. I ran across an article that had some cryptic/technical arguments from someone with the W3C as to why. They were decent, but that's about it. I understand that they are looking at things from a more wide reaching technical point of view, but they seem to forget the sayings, "You can't please everyone." and "What works, and what's logical are two different beasts." "Read-Only", the coder gets the data easily in one line without a hidden field, but the user gets confused and rightly so. "Disabled", the user gets every time and understands with little thought, but the coder gets jack returned if they need it for some reason without extra coding for a hidden field and extra code to check. Holding state data is already a bit bloated, be it via Javascript or PHP. How it alluded them to state that they look identical and have the only difference aware to only programmer I'll never understand since surely upwards of 90% of the time that would be the needed and expected action in the "real world"... In both cases the user can't change the data, so they may as well be the same look to them. The coder needs an option there data-wise in several scenarios, so it makes sense to have them. Then if you wanted it to look like the current "Read-Only" box then that should have been in CSS. Ex of my opine: -- Normal w/ passed value. -- Greyed nothing passed. -- Greyed w/ passed value. -- Same as above with the box looking different from CSS (like perhaps the way it looks now... :P lol.) Well, that's my two scents. Haven't seen a scenario yet that that would have definitely conflicted with. Lol. Working with it right now. I ran across an article that had some cryptic/technical arguments from someone with the W3C as to why. They were decent, but that’s about it. I understand that they are looking at things from a more wide reaching technical point of view, but they seem to forget the sayings, “You can’t please everyone.” and “What works, and what’s logical are two different beasts.”

“Read-Only”, the coder gets the data easily in one line without a hidden field, but the user gets confused and rightly so.

“Disabled”, the user gets every time and understands with little thought, but the coder gets jack returned if they need it for some reason without extra coding for a hidden field and extra code to check. Holding state data is already a bit bloated, be it via Javascript or PHP.

How it alluded them to state that they look identical and have the only difference aware to only programmer I’ll never understand since surely upwards of 90% of the time that would be the needed and expected action in the “real world”… In both cases the user can’t change the data, so they may as well be the same look to them. The coder needs an option there data-wise in several scenarios, so it makes sense to have them. Then if you wanted it to look like the current “Read-Only” box then that should have been in CSS.

Ex of my opine:
— Normal w/ passed value.
— Greyed nothing passed.
— Greyed w/ passed value.
— Same as above with the box looking different from CSS (like perhaps the way it looks now… :P lol.)

Well, that’s my two scents. Haven’t seen a scenario yet that that would have definitely conflicted with.

]]> Comment on Hooray! On Linux at last by Junelle http://rediscoverer.net/archives/28/comment-page-1#comment-6417 Junelle Fri, 04 Jul 2008 05:51:52 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/28#comment-6417 Great Job! Great Job!

]]> Comment on Firefox HTML Validator plugin fix (Ubuntu Feisty or Gutsy) by aj batac http://rediscoverer.net/archives/36/comment-page-1#comment-6302 aj batac Tue, 03 Jun 2008 03:14:10 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/36#comment-6302 Thanks for this Rolan! Thanks for this Rolan!

]]> Comment on XSS by phpcurious http://rediscoverer.net/archives/27/comment-page-1#comment-5184 phpcurious Wed, 23 Jan 2008 01:51:49 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/27#comment-5184 hmm, what's the latest news regarding your attempt to do XSS on that social networking site ? can you post how you did it ? hmm,

what’s the latest news regarding your attempt to do XSS on that social networking site ?
can you post how you did it ?

]]> Comment on CakePHP HTMLPurifier Component by SKP http://rediscoverer.net/archives/19/comment-page-1#comment-5056 SKP Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:22:29 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/19#comment-5056 You might be interested in htmLawed, a 45-kb, single-file, non-OOP, GPLv3-licensed script with low basal memory usage (0.5 MB) to filter illegal/disallowed HTML (tags, attributes, etc.) from user input. It also reduces XSS vulnerabilities, balances tags, etc. Visit <a href="http://www.bioinformatics.org/phplabware/internal_utilities/htmLawed/index.php" rel="nofollow">the htmLawed website</a>. You might be interested in htmLawed, a 45-kb, single-file, non-OOP, GPLv3-licensed script with low basal memory usage (0.5 MB) to filter illegal/disallowed HTML (tags, attributes, etc.) from user input. It also reduces XSS vulnerabilities, balances tags, etc.

Visit the htmLawed website.

]]> Comment on 3 Options by naisioxerloro http://rediscoverer.net/archives/14/comment-page-1#comment-4488 naisioxerloro Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:19:28 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/blog/archives/14#comment-4488 Hi. Good design, who make it? Hi.
Good design, who make it?

]]> Comment on SKYPE Phishing Attempt by rjene http://rediscoverer.net/archives/30/comment-page-1#comment-3832 rjene Fri, 19 Oct 2007 01:43:52 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/30#comment-3832 i hate stuff like these. but not as much as i hate ym web in the office right now hahaha . thanks for the heads up, chef. i hate stuff like these. but not as much as i hate ym web in the office right now hahaha . thanks for the heads up, chef.

]]> Comment on 1st Philippine PHP Developer’s Conference by rjene http://rediscoverer.net/archives/33/comment-page-1#comment-3750 rjene Mon, 15 Oct 2007 02:20:43 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/33#comment-3750 uy cool wehehehe uy cool wehehehe

]]> Comment on 1st Philippine PHP Developer’s Conference by aj batac http://rediscoverer.net/archives/33/comment-page-1#comment-3591 aj batac Wed, 10 Oct 2007 05:10:39 +0000 http://rediscoverer.net/archives/33#comment-3591 Nice! Salamat! :) Nice! Salamat! :)

]]>