Prev: ACU BENCH 8 - OPEN VMS acu connect
Next: CALL using OMITTED
From: Arnold Trembley on 26 Sep 2008 13:39
Pete Dashwood wrote:
> (snip)
>
> I'm pleased to report that these pages are now working in Firefox.

Just for clarity, here is the URL I used:
http://primacomputing.co.nz/cobdata

I can now view the COBOL source code using Firefox 3.0.2, but when I
click on the button to view the license, all it get is a big blue box.

If I click on View -> page source (or hit Ctrl-U) then microsoft notepad
opens up and I can see HTML which looks like this:

<p class="style2">1. Freely hack, refactor, reuse, and reorganize any of
the supplied source <strong>PROVIDED:</strong></p>
<div class="style2">
<p>&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp 1. You acknowledge the authors.</p>

<p>&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp 2. You do not sell the software we are
providing you, or pass it to any other
party. You may include our code and coding techniques in your own
software
and sell that, but our code should not comprise more than 50% of any
commercial software you produce, and you may not include more than
50% of
our code in any such product.</p>
<p>&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp 3. You will not include our code in any
similar commercial or non-commercial
product, intended for the same purpose, and for sale or distribution.
If you feel you have some enhancements and would like to add them
to the software, contact the authors or other members of the COBOL
programming community, by posting to the comp.lang.cobol forum of
Usenet,
or GOOGLE Groups.</p>
</div>
<p class="style2">2. There are no restrictions on using our code to
build freeware, or software for your
personal use.</p>

<p class="style2" style="font-weight: bold">WHAT YOU CAN NOT DO:</p>
<p class="style2">1. Pass the software to any other party. It is
<strong>NOT</strong> freely re-distributable
<b>EXCEPT</b> via
the website: <a href="http://primacomputing.co.nz/cobdata"
target="_blank">http://primacomputing.co.nz/cobdata</a> , and we would
urge you to pass
this URL to other interested parties.</p>
<p class="style2">2. Violate any of the 3 restrictions already stated
under the PROVIDED: clause of
point 1 under "WHAT YOU CAN DO", above.</p>
<p class="style2"><b>GENERAL:</b> </p>

<p class="style2">1. You use this software <strong>entirely at your own
risk</strong> and we will not be held accountable
for any consequential loss, or damage, financial or in any other
wise, arising from
your use of it. </p>
<p class="style2">2. We retain all intellectual property rights to the
software and this licence gives
you a non-exclusive right to use it within these terms of use. </p>
<p class="style2">3. We do not guarantee this software either now or in
the future, neither do we agree
to maintain it or fix bugs in it. However, we may do so if you
contact us and
report any problems you encounter. </p>
<p class="style2">4. You are assumed to have agreed to the terms of this
Licence if you are in possession
of the software. If you don't think this is fair, <strong>don't
download the software. </strong></p>
<p class="style2"><strong>FINALLY:</strong> We have tried to keep these
restrictions minimal and access to, and use of, the software as
free and easy as possible. Please observe this Licence as an
agreement, keep to the terms
of use, and enjoy the product. </p>
<p></p>


> I have to say that Firefox is more demanding than IE and it is more of a
> pain to write for because it requires options in tags that IE will default.
> Nevertheless, I'm happy with the results and especially pleased that (now I
> know what it needs and what CSS options it enjoys) I can make sure what I do
> in future is more Firefox friendly.
>
> Thanks to all concerned, including Richard. :-)
>
> Pete.

I'm rather fond of Firefox, and Thunderbird is my newsreader for reading
comp.lang.cobol.

Regards,


--
http://arnold.trembley.home.att.net/
From: Pete Dashwood on 26 Sep 2008 19:49


"Arnold Trembley" <arnold.trembley(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:f79Dk.240932$102.49980(a)bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Pete Dashwood wrote:
>> (snip) I'm pleased to report that these pages are now working in Firefox.
>
> Just for clarity, here is the URL I used:
> http://primacomputing.co.nz/cobdata
>
correct.

> I can now view the COBOL source code using Firefox 3.0.2, but when I click
> on the button to view the license, all it get is a big blue box.

ARRRRrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhh!!!

Thanks Arnold. I was so busy getting Firefox to work I forgot all about the
Licence :-)

I'll attend to it as soon as I have some time. It will need a dose of the
same CSS.

Thanks again for the heads up; sorry I missed it.


>
> I'm rather fond of Firefox, and Thunderbird is my newsreader for reading
> comp.lang.cobol.
>

Yes, it seems like a good Browser. I haven't used it much., but, once it got
the right CSS it behaves very well. I think we all like the things we are
used to. IE works for me and I don't get emotional about software.


Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."



From: James J. Gavan on 26 Sep 2008 23:13
Pete Dashwood wrote:
> "Arnold Trembley" <arnold.trembley(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:f79Dk.240932$102.49980(a)bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>>Pete Dashwood wrote:
>>
>>>(snip) I'm pleased to report that these pages are now working in Firefox.
>>
>>Just for clarity, here is the URL I used:
>>http://primacomputing.co.nz/cobdata
>>
>
> correct.
>
>
>>I can now view the COBOL source code using Firefox 3.0.2, but when I click
>>on the button to view the license, all it get is a big blue box.
>
>
> ARRRRrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhh!!!
>
> Thanks Arnold. I was so busy getting Firefox to work I forgot all about the
> Licence :-)
>
> I'll attend to it as soon as I have some time. It will need a dose of the
> same CSS.
>
> Thanks again for the heads up; sorry I missed it.
>
>
>
>>I'm rather fond of Firefox, and Thunderbird is my newsreader for reading
>>comp.lang.cobol.
>>
>
>
> Yes, it seems like a good Browser. I haven't used it much., but, once it got
> the right CSS it behaves very well. I think we all like the things we are
> used to. IE works for me and I don't get emotional about software.
>
>
> Pete.

Maybe not emotional, but you do seem to get attached to Microsoft
products :-) Quite some years back now. but I recall something you did
and it was IE-based and didn't work in other browsers, (it was a very
minor glitch). I would have thought once bitten twice shy. It's about
that time I picked up on Opera not acknowledging a right-click to pop-up
a supplementary menu (your own). About Opera you replied well there's
the WG3C Standard, or whatever it's called. But from the saga of the
blue screen (Firefox and Opera for starters), in your current project,
there's not too much of a crystallized standard is there ? No doubt
there's a reference to "implementor defined" - and since Day One of the
COBOL Standards, the phrase "implementor defined" has been a stinker.

There are just some of us who prefer not to use MS IE :-

(a) Word has it that hackers aim themselves at MS products, (because of
the huge area that covers), so cautiously we avoid MS when we can

(b) And personally, while I will applaud Bill Gates as an innovative
force in EDP - I just can't hack a monopoly - that's not debatable, you
wont change my mind.

My IP (shaw.ca from whom I get Webbing/TV/telephone), just offered some
Security Software free - but you gotta use IE - END OF STORY.

I haven't got back to your demo 'cos we went this afternoon for our lox
and cream cheese in a Bagel, at Bragg Creek - I'll take a look when your
IE and Firefox versions are compatible.

Now here's an intriguing one - the blurred menu bar in Firefox. Shows up
fine in IE. So what gives - both displays must be using the same RGB
palette ????

So Next project - make sure it works in Firefox/Opera and then test if
it works in your beloved MS IE :-)

Jimmy
From: Pete Dashwood on 27 Sep 2008 01:57


"James J. Gavan" <jgavandeletethis(a)shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dxhDk.1113$M_7.696(a)newsfe03.iad...
> Pete Dashwood wrote:
>> "Arnold Trembley" <arnold.trembley(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>> news:f79Dk.240932$102.49980(a)bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>>>Pete Dashwood wrote:
>>>
>>>>(snip) I'm pleased to report that these pages are now working in
>>>>Firefox.
>>>
>>>Just for clarity, here is the URL I used:
>>>http://primacomputing.co.nz/cobdata
>>>
>>
>> correct.
>>
>>
>>>I can now view the COBOL source code using Firefox 3.0.2, but when I
>>>click on the button to view the license, all it get is a big blue box.
>>
>>
>> ARRRRrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhh!!!
>>
>> Thanks Arnold. I was so busy getting Firefox to work I forgot all about
>> the Licence :-)
>>
>> I'll attend to it as soon as I have some time. It will need a dose of the
>> same CSS.
>>
>> Thanks again for the heads up; sorry I missed it.
>>
>>
>>
>>>I'm rather fond of Firefox, and Thunderbird is my newsreader for reading
>>>comp.lang.cobol.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, it seems like a good Browser. I haven't used it much., but, once it
>> got the right CSS it behaves very well. I think we all like the things we
>> are used to. IE works for me and I don't get emotional about software.
>>
>>
>> Pete.
>
> Maybe not emotional, but you do seem to get attached to Microsoft products
> :-)

I like stuff that works. MS products have worked fine for me so I see no
reason to change. Believe me, if Windows 7 turns out to be a dog, I'll be
into Linux before you can say: "Apache!" (or even hum a few bars of it...)

> Quite some years back now. but I recall something you did and it was
> IE-based and didn't work in other browsers, (it was a very minor glitch).
> I would have thought once bitten twice shy.

That was a long time ago with a different technology. I DID try at the time
to get some kind of Browser compatibility. In the end I just gave up. Today
there are much more powerful tools available, and I have a lot more
understanding than I did then.


> It's about that time I picked up on Opera not acknowledging a right-click
> to pop-up a supplementary menu (your own). About Opera you replied well
> there's the WG3C Standard, or whatever it's called. But from the saga of
> the blue screen (Firefox and Opera for starters), in your current project,
> there's not too much of a crystallized standard is there ?

It's not that there ISN'T a standard, so much as it can be interpeted
different ways. You may have seen Richard and I disagree over the
interpretation of how iframes are supposed to work. If Richard implemented
his understanding and only ever used them to display HTML pages, he would
not be "wrong"... but neither am I for using them to display just about
anything I want to. Who's observing the standard? Well, we both are, but in
different ways.

Have you looked at the site since it became (mostly) Firefox friendly? I
think Firefox is a very good Browser, but it is definitely more strict than
IE. This may be no bad thing of course. It took me quite a while, and
considerable experimentation, to understand the differences in CSS which
Firefox required. Once I did, there was no problem.


> No doubt there's a reference to "implementor defined" - and since Day One
> of the COBOL Standards, the phrase "implementor defined" has been a
> stinker.
>
> There are just some of us who prefer not to use MS IE :-

Sure, I have many frends who don't use MS and I have many friends who do. I
don't think one or other of them is "wrong". People should use what works
for them. I do. On this occasion, because of the nature of the software and
the fact that it is connected to a programming community, I went to
considerable trouble to ensure Firefox compliance. Ironically, if it were
commercial, I probably wouldn't do that (almost certainly not as a matter of
priority)... I'd RATHER it was compliant, but it really comes down to how
difficult it is to make it so. Fortunately, today's tools (some of which
come from that evil MS empire...) are much better than yesterday's, and
between Dreamweaver Studio 8 and VS 2008, I was able to get the problem
resolved.
>
> (a) Word has it that hackers aim themselves at MS products, (because of
> the huge area that covers), so cautiously we avoid MS when we can
>

I lived in London during the IRA bombing campaign. If you let risk
intimidate you, you curtail your life. The answer is to manage the risk
until it is acceptable to you. (Don't go to prime targets like Harrod's and
Selfridge's on a Saturday; avoid the underground, taxis are plentiful and
walking is healthy... etc. Most of all, don't just shut down and stay home.

There IS a risk with IE but there is with any software. And MS have more
experience at counter threating than anyone else around... :-) I can
honestly say, I have had my system infected once in15 years. It took me 8
hours to remove it and that was a very long time ago. Nothing since. (And I
have layered protection in place, some of which I wrote myself.) I don't kid
myself I am impregnable (few systems would be against a clever and
determined attack) but I don't worry too much about kids writing malware
after school in VB...


> (b) And personally, while I will applaud Bill Gates as an innovative force
> in EDP - I just can't hack a monopoly - that's not debatable, you wont
> change my mind.

Why would I try? I really don't care what software people use.

>
> My IP (shaw.ca from whom I get Webbing/TV/telephone), just offered some
> Security Software free - but you gotta use IE - END OF STORY.
>
I can understand their point, although I don't agree with it. From their
point of view it is just too huge to provide support for all the possible
Browsers people use, and so they go with the flow. Over 70% of Browser usage
is IE. Having said that, if 70% of the population drove Fords, I still
wouldn't buy one. :-) Personal choice is a complex matter, with many
intangibles.

> I haven't got back to your demo 'cos we went this afternoon for our lox
> and cream cheese in a Bagel, at Bragg Creek - I'll take a look when your
> IE and Firefox versions are compatible.

They pretty much are now, with the exception of the Licence, which I'll be
fixing in the next hour or so.

I like the sound of your lox and cream cheese bagel. I just went and got a
Kiwi Burger from MacDonalds, something I do about 5 times a year... :-). Too
busy trying to catch up on actual work that got neglected while I was sick,
although I'll definitely stop later and prepare some proper food. Your lox
idea reminded me I have a very nice salmon fillet in the frig, so I'll
probably grill that with a few bits and pieces and a cheeky crisp Chardonnay
from the coastal hills of Hawke's Bay... :-). The Kiwi Burger is pretty
good... beef pattie, beetroot, cheese, an egg, tomato, lettuce, and the
usual condiments, all on MacD's new low sugar bun :-) $NZ 6.00 (around 4 US,
I think, haven't checked for a while...)
>
> Now here's an intriguing one - the blurred menu bar in Firefox. Shows up
> fine in IE. So what gives - both displays must be using the same RGB
> palette ????

It should show clearly in both Browsers, once it is enabled. You need to
view the Licence to enable it.

I'm not going to comment further because you'll say I'm biased, which I
probably am...:-)

>
> So Next project - make sure it works in Firefox/Opera and then test if it
> works in your beloved MS IE :-)

Yes, thank you Jimmy... :-)

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: ACU BENCH 8 - OPEN VMS acu connect
Next: CALL using OMITTED