Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #10528 > unrolled thread

allow blocked content

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-24 15:47 +1100
    Re: allow blocked content Martin Honnen <mahotrash@yahoo.de> - 2012-01-24 12:45 +0100
      Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-25 07:32 +1100
        Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-24 15:00 -0800
          Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-25 13:56 +1100
            Re: allow blocked content Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-25 04:11 +0100
              Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-25 15:27 +1100
                Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-25 23:08 +1100
                  Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-25 09:23 -0800
                    Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 14:49 +1100
                      Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-25 20:17 -0800
                        Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-27 07:54 +1100
                          Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-27 01:31 +0100
                            Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-26 19:46 -0800
                              Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-27 14:08 +0100
                                Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-27 08:33 -0800
                                  [OT] On- and off-topic postings (was: Strecthed Fonts) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-27 19:09 +0100
                            Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Dr J R Stockton <reply1204@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-28 18:37 +0000
                          Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-26 16:38 -0800
                            Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-27 14:19 +1100
                              Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2012-01-26 19:43 -0800
                          Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-28 10:30 +0100
                            Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 07:58 +1100
      Re: allow blocked content Dr J R Stockton <reply1204@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-25 19:49 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#10528 — allow blocked content

Is there a way to allow users to run a web page that depends on js 
locally to run in IE when IE has been configured not to allow active 
content to run locally and yet not have a warning dialog appear?

The page uses js but not any ActiveX control that I know of.

The user is given the page from a trusted source and will copy them to 
their computer to run them.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#10531

Andrew Poulos wrote:
> Is there a way to allow users to run a web page that depends on js
> locally to run in IE when IE has been configured not to allow active
> content to run locally and yet not have a warning dialog appear?
>
> The page uses js but not any ActiveX control that I know of.
>
> The user is given the page from a trusted source and will copy them to
> their computer to run them.

You could consider to provide a .hta file instead of a .html file, that 
way the document is treated as HTML application 
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms536471%28v=vs.85%29.aspx) and 
IE's security settings don't apply I think.


-- 

	Martin Honnen --- MVP Data Platform Development
	http://msmvps.com/blogs/martin_honnen/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10548

On 24/01/2012 10:45 PM, Martin Honnen wrote:
> Andrew Poulos wrote:
>> Is there a way to allow users to run a web page that depends on js
>> locally to run in IE when IE has been configured not to allow active
>> content to run locally and yet not have a warning dialog appear?
>>
>> The page uses js but not any ActiveX control that I know of.
>>
>> The user is given the page from a trusted source and will copy them to
>> their computer to run them.
>
> You could consider to provide a .hta file instead of a .html file, that
> way the document is treated as HTML application
> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms536471%28v=vs.85%29.aspx) and
> IE's security settings don't apply I think.
>
I have tried using a .hta file but it appears to render the page 
noticeably differently for no reason.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10549

On Jan 24, 2:32 pm, Andrew Poulos <ap_p...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I have tried using a .hta file but it appears to render the page
> noticeably differently for no reason.

You can be certain there is a reason.

Are you using an appropriate doctype for instance?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10552

On 25/01/2012 10:00 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2:32 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> I have tried using a .hta file but it appears to render the page
>> noticeably differently for no reason.
>
> You can be certain there is a reason.

Ok, I should have said for no reason I'm aware of.

> Are you using an appropriate doctype for instance?

According to
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/ms536496%28v=vs.85%29.aspx>
a .hta starts with <html>. Is this not correct?

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10553

Andrew Poulos wrote:

> On 25/01/2012 10:00 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>> On Jan 24, 2:32 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>>> I have tried using a .hta file but it appears to render the page
>>> noticeably differently for no reason.
>> You can be certain there is a reason.
>> Are you using an appropriate doctype for instance?
> 
> According to
> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/ms536496%28v=vs.85%29.aspx>
> a .hta starts with <html>. Is this not correct?

That URI is 404-compliant here.  However, having only superficial experience 
with HTAs, I find it unlikely that a .hta *needs to* start with `<html>'; it 
is more likely that you have found a bad example (the MSDN Library is strewn 
with them). 

AFAIK, the layout engine that is used is the same as the one that Internet 
Explorer usually uses (MSHTML), and we do know what happens there if you 
omit the DOCTYPE declaration or omit the system identifier from it.

You could simply have tried *before* you asked.


PointedEars
-- 
Danny Goodman's books are out of date and teach practices that are
positively harmful for cross-browser scripting.
  -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <cife6q$253$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> (2004)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10554

On 25/01/2012 2:11 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Andrew Poulos wrote:
>
>> On 25/01/2012 10:00 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>> On Jan 24, 2:32 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>   wrote:
>>>> I have tried using a .hta file but it appears to render the page
>>>> noticeably differently for no reason.
>>> You can be certain there is a reason.
>>> Are you using an appropriate doctype for instance?
>>
>> According to
>> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/ms536496%28v=vs.85%29.aspx>
>> a .hta starts with<html>. Is this not correct?
>
> That URI is 404-compliant here.  However, having only superficial experience
> with HTAs, I find it unlikely that a .hta *needs to* start with `<html>'; it
> is more likely that you have found a bad example (the MSDN Library is strewn
> with them).
>
> AFAIK, the layout engine that is used is the same as the one that Internet
> Explorer usually uses (MSHTML), and we do know what happens there if you
> omit the DOCTYPE declaration or omit the system identifier from it.
>
> You could simply have tried *before* you asked.

Yes I should've. I didn't because I had wrongly assumed that MS would 
documented their own features correctly. I just did a quick test and 
adding an appropriate doctype does appear to make a positive difference.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10568

On 25/01/2012 3:27 PM, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> On 25/01/2012 2:11 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Andrew Poulos wrote:
>>
>>> On 25/01/2012 10:00 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>>> On Jan 24, 2:32 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have tried using a .hta file but it appears to render the page
>>>>> noticeably differently for no reason.
>>>> You can be certain there is a reason.
>>>> Are you using an appropriate doctype for instance?
>>>
>>> According to
>>> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/ms536496%28v=vs.85%29.aspx>
>>> a .hta starts with<html>. Is this not correct?
>>
>> That URI is 404-compliant here. However, having only superficial
>> experience
>> with HTAs, I find it unlikely that a .hta *needs to* start with
>> `<html>'; it
>> is more likely that you have found a bad example (the MSDN Library is
>> strewn
>> with them).
>>
>> AFAIK, the layout engine that is used is the same as the one that
>> Internet
>> Explorer usually uses (MSHTML), and we do know what happens there if you
>> omit the DOCTYPE declaration or omit the system identifier from it.
>>
>> You could simply have tried *before* you asked.
>
> Yes I should've. I didn't because I had wrongly assumed that MS would
> documented their own features correctly. I just did a quick test and
> adding an appropriate doctype does appear to make a positive difference.

More testing, and it appears that adding an appropriate doctype (in this 
case HTML 4 Strict) has sorted the display issues I was having.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10578

On Jan 25, 6:08 am, Andrew Poulos <ap_p...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> More testing, and it appears that adding an appropriate doctype (in this
> case HTML 4 Strict) has sorted the display issues I was having.

For future reference: html 5 doctype is not allowed in an HTA.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10591 — Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On 26/01/2012 4:23 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> On Jan 25, 6:08 am, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> More testing, and it appears that adding an appropriate doctype (in this
>> case HTML 4 Strict) has sorted the display issues I was having.
>
> For future reference: html 5 doctype is not allowed in an HTA.

With a HTA and a HTM having the same HTML 4 Strict doctype elements are 
displaying in the same on-screen position in the HTA and in IE. One odd 
thing I've just noticed is that a line of text is longer in IE.

I did screen captures and compared the two and it looks like IE has 
"stretched" the spacing between the letters and/or the letters 
themselves ever so slightly.

The only thing the HTA has that the HTM doesn't is this

<HTA:APPLICATION
  id="testapp"
  applicationname="Sample"
  icon="content/sample.ico"
  border="thin"
  borderStyle="normal"
  caption="yes"
  contextMenu="no"
  navigable="yes"
  scroll="no"
  selection="no"
  showInTaskbar="yes"
  singleInstance="yes"
  windowState="normal">

Why would IE stretch fonts (or the HTA compress them)?

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10592 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On Jan 25, 9:49 pm, Andrew Poulos <ap_p...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> With a HTA and a HTM having the same HTML 4 Strict doctype elements are
> displaying in the same on-screen position in the HTA and in IE. One odd
> thing I've just noticed is that a line of text is longer in IE.
>
> I did screen captures and compared the two and it looks like IE has
> "stretched" the spacing between the letters and/or the letters
> themselves ever so slightly.
>
> The only thing the HTA has that the HTM doesn't is this
>
> <HTA:APPLICATION
>   id="testapp"
>   applicationname="Sample"
>   icon="content/sample.ico"
>   border="thin"
>   borderStyle="normal"
>   caption="yes"
>   contextMenu="no"
>   navigable="yes"
>   scroll="no"
>   selection="no"
>   showInTaskbar="yes"
>   singleInstance="yes"
>   windowState="normal">
>
> Why would IE stretch fonts (or the HTA compress them)?

Mind posting a reduced example I could look at?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10611 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On 26/01/2012 3:17 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> On Jan 25, 9:49 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>> With a HTA and a HTM having the same HTML 4 Strict doctype elements are
>> displaying in the same on-screen position in the HTA and in IE. One odd
>> thing I've just noticed is that a line of text is longer in IE.
>>
>> I did screen captures and compared the two and it looks like IE has
>> "stretched" the spacing between the letters and/or the letters
>> themselves ever so slightly.
>>
>> The only thing the HTA has that the HTM doesn't is this
>>
>> <HTA:APPLICATION
>>    id="testapp"
>>    applicationname="Sample"
>>    icon="content/sample.ico"
>>    border="thin"
>>    borderStyle="normal"
>>    caption="yes"
>>    contextMenu="no"
>>    navigable="yes"
>>    scroll="no"
>>    selection="no"
>>    showInTaskbar="yes"
>>    singleInstance="yes"
>>    windowState="normal">
>>
>> Why would IE stretch fonts (or the HTA compress them)?
>
> Mind posting a reduced example I could look at?

I made a simple example that demonstrates the issue here
<https://secure.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8a6e6a8c60636dae9ca5>
Its a zip that contains a HTA and HTM and a CSS file.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10619 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

Andrew Poulos wrote:

> On 26/01/2012 3:17 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>> Why would IE stretch fonts (or the HTA compress them)?
>> Mind posting a reduced example I could look at?
> 
> I made a simple example that demonstrates the issue here
> <https://secure.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8a6e6a8c60636dae9ca5>
> Its a zip that contains a HTA and HTM and a CSS file.

FYI: HTAs are *off-topic* here unless the problem concerns the use of 
JScript or MSHTML DOM in them.


PointedEars
-- 
> If you get a bunch of authors […] that state the same "best practices"
> in any programming language, then you can bet who is wrong or right...
Not with javascript. Nonsense propagates like wildfire in this field.
  -- Richard Cornford, comp.lang.javascript, 2011-11-14

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10626 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On Jan 26, 6:31 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
>
> FYI: HTAs are *off-topic* here unless the problem concerns the use of
> JScript or MSHTML DOM in them.

Indeed. Of course, it is no more off-topic than most conversations
that occur here on CLJS (and I'm not referring to the spam). At least
this one is more useful.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10643 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> FYI: HTAs are *off-topic* here unless the problem concerns the use of
>> JScript or MSHTML DOM in them.
> 
> Indeed. Of course, it is no more off-topic than most conversations
> that occur here on CLJS (and I'm not referring to the spam).  […]

Name one.  I am not aware of any recently.  Of course, I am not reading most 
messages coming from Google Groups, thanks to its intrinsically bad S/N 
ratio.


PointedEars
-- 
Sometimes, what you learn is wrong. If those wrong ideas are close to the 
root of the knowledge tree you build on a particular subject, pruning the 
bad branches can sometimes cause the whole tree to collapse.
  -- Mike Duffy in cljs, <news:Xns9FB6521286DB8invalidcom@94.75.214.39>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10650 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On Jan 27, 7:08 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
>
> Name one.  I am not aware of any recently.  Of course, I am not reading most
> messages coming from Google Groups, thanks to its intrinsically bad S/N
> ratio.


"FAQ Topic - How can I create a Date object from a String?
(2011-02-15) "

Just look at how many of those messages actually have something to do
with Dates at all. Sure, its related to JavaScript, but I wouldn't
count that towards relevance really since the relationship to the OP
is stretched. There are many threads that end up like this.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10655 — [OT] On- and off-topic postings (was: Strecthed Fonts)

Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Name one.  I am not aware of any recently.  Of course, I am not reading
>> most messages coming from Google Groups, thanks to its intrinsically bad
>> S/N ratio.
> 
> "FAQ Topic - How can I create a Date object from a String?
> (2011-02-15) "
> 
> Just look at how many of those messages actually have something to do
> with Dates at all. Sure, its related to JavaScript, but I wouldn't
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> count that towards relevance really since the relationship to the OP
                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> is stretched. There are many threads that end up like this.

You have a misconception there.  A posting or a part of a posting is called 
"off-topic" if it does not relate to the topic of the *newsgroup* at all.

The topic of a newsgroup is described in the newsgroup's charter and 
tagline, but is actually defined implicitly by the regularly active 
participants of the newsgroup (regulars) through their use.  As such, it may 
gradually change over time, as it is the case with comp.lang.javascript: 
Even though charter and tagline says that Netscape JavaScript is the topic, 
we are already discussing other ECMAScript implementations than 
JavaScript[tm] and common applications of these programming languages like 
DOM scripting here by now.  (And that is good so.  However, it would also be 
a good idea if the charter and tagline would be updated accordingly.)

What you are describing above is called "thread drift" instead, which is 
usual and healthy for Network News and, I daresay, any electronic discussion 
medium.  Keep in mind that this is _not_ a support forum.


HTH

F'up2 PointedEars
-- 
    realism:    HTML 4.01 Strict
    evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
    madness:    XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
                                                    -- Bjoern Hoehrmann

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10693 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

In comp.lang.javascript message <1668914.JFYEL58v44@PointedEars.de>,
Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:31:44, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> posted:

>Andrew Poulos wrote:
>
>> On 26/01/2012 3:17 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>>> Why would IE stretch fonts (or the HTA compress them)?
>>> Mind posting a reduced example I could look at?
>>
>> I made a simple example that demonstrates the issue here
>> <https://secure.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8a6e6a8c60636dae9ca5>
>> Its a zip that contains a HTA and HTM and a CSS file.
>
>FYI: HTAs are *off-topic* here unless the problem concerns the use of
>JScript or MSHTML DOM in them.

OAF.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London UK. replyYYWW merlyn demon co uk Turnpike 6.05.
   Web <http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html> -> Timo Salmi: Usenet Q&A.
   Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/news-use.htm> :  about usage of News.
 No Encoding. Quotes precede replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Mail no News.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10621 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On Jan 26, 2:54 pm, Andrew Poulos <ap_p...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I made a simple example that demonstrates the issue here
> <https://secure.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8a6e6a8c60636dae9ca5>
> Its a zip that contains a HTA and HTM and a CSS file.

Unless explicitly told otherwise, HTA's will interpret html the same
as IE8 at best. You'll have to use the following to get a consistent
look:

<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9"/>


I believe this was done in order to minimize problems with archaic
System-Admin software that never changes. In IE9 the "filter" property
means something different for example.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10625 — Re: Strecthed Fonts Was: Re: allow blocked content

On 27/01/2012 11:38 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2:54 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>> I made a simple example that demonstrates the issue here
>> <https://secure.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8a6e6a8c60636dae9ca5>
>> Its a zip that contains a HTA and HTM and a CSS file.
>
> Unless explicitly told otherwise, HTA's will interpret html the same
> as IE8 at best. You'll have to use the following to get a consistent
> look:
>
> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9"/>

If a user has IE 8 installed what effect, if any, will the above META 
tag have?

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web