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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #19158 > unrolled thread

Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app

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

Contents

  Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app ericgorr@gmail.com - 2013-04-08 12:26 -0700
    Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-04-08 22:25 +0200
      Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 14:06 -0700
    Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 23:34 +0200
      Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-04-08 22:38 +0100
        Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 14:48 -0700
          Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-04-08 23:07 +0100
            Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-09 00:20 +0200
              Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-04-08 23:31 +0100
                Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-09 01:07 +0200
                  Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 16:28 -0700
                    Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-09 01:45 +0200
                      Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 16:52 -0700
      Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 14:47 -0700
        Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-08 23:58 +0200
    Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app x@x.com (znôrt) - 2013-04-08 23:50 +0200
      Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-09 00:03 +0200
      Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 15:06 -0700
        Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-04-08 23:22 +0100
          Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 15:32 -0700
        Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app x@x.com (znôrt) - 2013-04-09 00:39 +0200
          Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-09 00:54 +0200
            Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app x@x.com (znôrt) - 2013-04-09 01:25 +0200
          Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 15:56 -0700
            Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app x@x.com (znôrt) - 2013-04-09 01:25 +0200
        Re: Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-04-09 00:40 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#19158 — Seeking Javascript framework for standalone app

I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build a fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app would need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or Windows machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser.

Thank you.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#19159

 wrote on 08 apr 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:

> I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build a
> fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will
> need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a
> webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app
> would need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or
> Windows machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be
> double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser. 

Internet explorer?
Chrome?
Etc?

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#19160

On Monday, April 8, 2013 4:25:22 PM UTC-4, Evertjan. wrote:
> wrote on 08 apr 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> 
> 
> > I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build a
> 
> > fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will
> 
> > need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a
> 
> > webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app
> 
> > would need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or
> 
> > Windows machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be
> 
> > double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser. 
> 
> 
> 
> Internet explorer?
> 
> Chrome?
> 
> Etc?

Yes.

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

#19161

On 2013-04-08 21:26, ericgorr@gmail.com wrote:
> I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build
> a fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will
> need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a
> webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app would
> need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or Windows
> machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be
> double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser.

How is that a stand-alone app if you need a browser to run it?

No framework is required for what you describe - just put some HTML and
JS in your index.html file. Unless there's something else you expect the
framework to do for you...?

- stefan

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

#19162

In article <kjvd53$drm$1@news.albasani.net>,
 Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2013-04-08 21:26, ericgorr@gmail.com wrote:
> > I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build
> > a fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will
> > need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a
> > webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app would
> > need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or Windows
> > machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be
> > double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser.
> 
> How is that a stand-alone app if you need a browser to run it?
> 
> No framework is required for what you describe - just put some HTML and
> JS in your index.html file. Unless there's something else you expect the
> framework to do for you...?

Yes, what on earth is the OP talking about? Framework? WTF is that?

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

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

#19164

On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:38:23 PM UTC-4, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <kjvd53$drm$1@news.albasani.net>,
> 
>  Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > On 2013-04-08 21:26, ericgorr@... wrote:
> 
> > > I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build
> 
> > > a fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will
> 
> > > need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a
> 
> > > webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app would
> 
> > > need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or Windows
> 
> > > machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be
> 
> > > double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser.
> 
> > 
> 
> > How is that a stand-alone app if you need a browser to run it?
> 
> > 
> 
> > No framework is required for what you describe - just put some HTML and
> 
> > JS in your index.html file. Unless there's something else you expect the
> 
> > framework to do for you...?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, what on earth is the OP talking about? Framework? WTF is that?

While there are many frameworks out there, a couple you may want to checkout to get a better idea of what they are:

http://www.cappuccino-project.org/
http://sproutcore.com/

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

#19169

In article <ad83d39b-64ed-4024-80aa-e2ff472aadfc@googlegroups.com>,
 Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:38:23 PM UTC-4, Tim Streater wrote:

> > Yes, what on earth is the OP talking about? Framework? WTF is that?
> 
> While there are many frameworks out there, a couple you may want to checkout 
> to get a better idea of what they are:
> 
> http://www.cappuccino-project.org/
> http://sproutcore.com/

The 20k or so lines of JavaScript in my app work just fine without any 
sort of framework at all.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

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

#19170

Tim Streater wrote:

> Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:38:23 PM UTC-4, Tim Streater wrote:
>> 
>> > Yes, what on earth is the OP talking about? Framework? WTF is that?
>> 
>> While there are many frameworks out there, a couple you may want to
>> checkout to get a better idea of what they are:
>> 
>> http://www.cappuccino-project.org/
>> http://sproutcore.com/
> 
> The 20k or so lines of JavaScript in my app work just fine without any
> sort of framework at all.

I am certainly not making a case for “frameworks” here; however, given the 
quality of code and advice you have posted here so far, those lines of code 
(which are far too many) work only as well as you are able tell.  As for me, 
I certainly hope I will never be in a position where I have to rely on your 
work in that field.

HTH

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19172

In article <1462860.9amNCTqQPc@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> Tim Streater wrote:
> 
> > Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:38:23 PM UTC-4, Tim Streater wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Yes, what on earth is the OP talking about? Framework? WTF is that?
> >> 
> >> While there are many frameworks out there, a couple you may want to
> >> checkout to get a better idea of what they are:
> >> 
> >> http://www.cappuccino-project.org/
> >> http://sproutcore.com/
> > 
> > The 20k or so lines of JavaScript in my app work just fine without any
> > sort of framework at all.
> 
> I am certainly not making a case for “frameworks” here; however, given the 
> quality of code and advice you have posted here so far, those lines of code 
> (which are far too many) work only as well as you are able tell.  As for me, 
> I certainly hope I will never be in a position where I have to rely on your 
> work in that field.

What an ignorant fool you are. Or perhaps you merely suffer from 
delusions. "Too many notes, Herr Mozart!", is that it?

My app has just the right number of JavaScript statements to implement 
what is described in the accompanying 50 page manual. Doubtless it could 
be improved - just like any piece of software.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

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

#19179

Tim Streater wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>> > The 20k or so lines of JavaScript in my app work just fine without any
>> > sort of framework at all.
>> 
>> I am certainly not making a case for “frameworks” here; however, given
>> the quality of code and advice you have posted here so far, those lines
>> of code (which are far too many) work only as well as you are able tell. 
>> As for me, I certainly hope I will never be in a position where I have to
>> rely on your work in that field.
> 
> What an ignorant fool you are. Or perhaps you merely suffer from
> delusions. "Too many notes, Herr Mozart!", is that it?

You consider yourself equal to Mozart?  Talk about arrogance.

Your problem is, Salieri, that you may know a few notes; but what you play 
here, dilettantish, is not music.  Therefore it matters little if you call 
something harmony.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19182

On Monday, April 8, 2013 7:07:02 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Tim Streater wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> 
> >> Tim Streater wrote:
> 
> >> > The 20k or so lines of JavaScript in my app work just fine without any
> 
> >> > sort of framework at all.
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> I am certainly not making a case for “frameworks” here; however, given
> 
> >> the quality of code and advice you have posted here so far, those lines
> 
> >> of code (which are far too many) work only as well as you are able tell. 
> 
> >> As for me, I certainly hope I will never be in a position where I have to
> 
> >> rely on your work in that field.
> 
> > 
> 
> > What an ignorant fool you are. Or perhaps you merely suffer from
> 
> > delusions. "Too many notes, Herr Mozart!", is that it?
> 
> 
> 
> You consider yourself equal to Mozart?  Talk about arrogance.
> 
> Your problem is, Salieri, that you may know a few notes; but what you play 
> here, dilettantish, is not music.  Therefore it matters little if you call 
> something harmony.

 _________________________
|                         |
|      **Warning!!**      |
|                         |
|       **Danger!**       |
|                         |
| Do Not Feed The Troll!! |
|                         | _________________________
|     Feeding A Troll     ||                         |
| Will NOT Make It Leave! ||     This is a Troll     |
|                         ||     Leave it alone.     |
|   If Fed A Troll Will   ||                         |
|     Stay And Try To     ||      :.:\:\:/:/:.:      |
|   Get More Hand-Outs!   ||     :=.' -   - '.=:     |
|                         ||     '=(\ 9   9 /)='     |
|  Trolls Are Considered  ||        (  (_)  )        |
|   Extremely Dangerous!  ||        /`-vvv-'\        |
|                         ||       /         \       |
| If You Spot A Troll Do  ||      / /|,,,,,|\ \      |
|      Not Approach.      ||     /_//  /^\  \\_\     |
|                         ||     WW(  (   )  )WW     |
| Only Trained Moderators ||      __\,,\ /,,/__      |
| Should Deal With Trolls ||     (______Y______)     |
|                         ||                         |
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~||~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
  | |                 | |    | |                 | |
  | |                 | |    | |                 | |
  | |                 | |    | |                 | |
  | |                 | |    | |                 | |
  | |                 | |    | |                 | |
  |~|                 |~|    |~|                 |~|

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

#19183

Eric Gorr wrote:

[fixed the Googlodyte's quotes again]

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>> > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> >> I am certainly not making a case for “frameworks” here; however, given
>> >> the quality of code and advice you have posted here so far, those
>> >> lines of code (which are far too many) work only as well as you are
>> >> able tell.
>> >> 
>> >> As for me, I certainly hope I will never be in a position where I have
>> >> to rely on your work in that field.
>> > 
>> > What an ignorant fool you are. Or perhaps you merely suffer from
>> > 
>> > delusions. "Too many notes, Herr Mozart!", is that it?

>  _________________________
> |                         |
> |      **Warning!!**      |
> |                         |
> |       **Danger!**       |
> |                         |
> | Do Not Feed The Troll!! |
> |                         | _________________________
> |     Feeding A Troll     ||                         |
> | Will NOT Make It Leave! ||     This is a Troll     |
> |                         ||     Leave it alone.     |
> |   If Fed A Troll Will   ||                         |
> |     Stay And Try To     ||      :.:\:\:/:/:.:      |
> |   Get More Hand-Outs!   ||     :=.' -   - '.=:     |
> |                         ||     '=(\ 9   9 /)='     |
> |  Trolls Are Considered  ||        (  (_)  )        |
> |   Extremely Dangerous!  ||        /`-vvv-'\        |
> |                         ||       /         \       |
> | If You Spot A Troll Do  ||      / /|,,,,,|\ \      |
> |      Not Approach.      ||     /_//  /^\  \\_\     |
> |                         ||     WW(  (   )  )WW     |
> | Only Trained Moderators ||      __\,,\ /,,/__      |
> | Should Deal With Trolls ||     (______Y______)     |
> |                         ||                         |
> |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~||~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
>   | |                 | |    | |                 | |
>   | |                 | |    | |                 | |
>   | |                 | |    | |                 | |
>   | |                 | |    | |                 | |
>   | |                 | |    | |                 | |
>   |~|                 |~|    |~|                 |~|

>> You consider yourself equal to Mozart?  Talk about arrogance.
>> 
>> Your problem is, Salieri, that you may know a few notes; but what you
>> play here, dilettantish, is not music.  Therefore it matters little if
>> you call something harmony.

It is a really good idea that you put up all those warning signs;
alas, you have misplaced them slightly.  There, I fixed it for you.

BTW, this newsgroup is not moderated.

BTW2, welcome to my killfile.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19184

On Monday, April 8, 2013 7:45:11 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
 
> BTW2, welcome to my killfile.

Best news I've heard all day, but I suspect it is a lie. So, to test...

What is so sad is that you didn't know the answer to the question and to cover your obvious ignorance, you simply lashed out like a child.

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

#19163

On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:34:27 PM UTC-4, Stefan Weiss wrote:
> On 2013-04-08 21:26, ericgorr@... wrote:
> 
> > I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build
> 
> > a fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I will
> 
> > need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not have a
> 
> > webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app would
> 
> > need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or Windows
> 
> > machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can be
> 
> > double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser.
> 
> 
> 
> How is that a stand-alone app if you need a browser to run it?

What would you call it? I am perfectly willing to call it whatever you think it should be called. Please substitute 'standalone' with whatever term you feel is best.
 
> No framework is required for what you describe - just put some HTML and
> 
> JS in your index.html file. Unless there's something else you expect the
> 
> framework to do for you...?

Well, the benefits of using a well designed framework are many. For example, they will deal with various differences between the browsers, provide powerful controls, binding support, etc. which is not trivial to do from scratch. You may want to check out Javascript frameworks like SproutCore or Cappuccino. In many situations, they can be quite compelling. The trouble is that with those, they don't seem to be designed to work well as standalone app.

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

#19166

Eric Gorr wrote:

[Removed intermediate empty lines]

> On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:34:27 PM UTC-4, Stefan Weiss wrote:
>> On 2013-04-08 21:26, ericgorr@... wrote:
>> > I am looking for recommendations for a javascript framework to build
>> > a fairly simple standalone app. What I mean by standalone is that I
>> > will need to be able to copy the app to a machine which does not hav
>> > a webserver installed and is not connected to the internet. The app
>> > would need to be able to be placed onto the desktop of an OS X or
>> > Windows machine with an index.html (or some similar file) which can
>> > be double-clicked to launch the app in a modern browser.
>> 
> […]
>> No framework is required for what you describe - just put some HTML and
>> JS in your index.html file. Unless there's something else you expect the
>> framework to do for you...?
> 
> Well, the benefits of using a well designed framework are many.

Please, surprise me.

> For example, they will deal with various differences between the browsers,

Differences that by now have mostly disappeared.

> provide powerful controls,

Controls that most of the time do not degrade gracefully, that are not 
accessible, not backwards-compatible, and not interoperable.

> binding support,

Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

> etc. which is not trivial to do from scratch.

So you do have no clue what you are talking about.  You are just parroting 
what you heard from marketing.

> You may want to check out Javascript frameworks like SproutCore or
> Cappuccino. In many situations, they can be quite compelling. The trouble
> is that with those, they don't seem to be designed to work well as
> standalone app.

You appear to be under the common misconception, purported and spread by 
other wannabes, that a framework would be a solution in itself; that you 
would not have to think and learn if you just used the right framework, as 
that would do the thinking for you.  However, know that frameworks are 
merely tools that can make software development easier (or harder, depending 
on your experience and the quality of the framework); they are a (possible, 
but not necessary) means to an end.

What good is a hammer if you do not know how to wield it, the kind of nails 
it should be used on, or if you are unable to tell from looking at *it* 
(instead of at its makers and their advertisement) whether its makers 
actually have done their job properly?

Learn programming, the underlying programming languages (here: ECMAScript 
implementations) and *existing* (host) APIs (like the DOM) first.  Then you 
will know that the best answer in many cases is to use no framework at all.

For example, there is no programming language named “Javascript” or 
“javascript”, and the features that you are referring to are not part of 
*any* programming language:

<http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>

BTW, please stop posting to Usenet using the borken Google Groups.  TIA.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19165

ericgorr@gmail.com writes:

> javascript framework to build a fairly simple standalone app. What I
> mean by standalone is that I will need to be able to copy the app to a
> machine which does not have a webserver installed and is not connected
> to the internet.

just in case you don't know, setting up a webserver is no hassle
nowadays, there are many tiny free servers you can fire up locally in no
time, in your case you wouldn't even have to worry about access policies
or workload. although simple, they provide a fully functional http
backend which will greatly expand the options available for developing
your webapp (after all that's how webapps are supposed to work).

as an example if your app needs some sort of persistent storage, running
directly off the filesystem will limit the tools at your disposal or
make it dependent on browser specific functionality.

as far as UI frameworks go, I would definitely recommend AngularJS.

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

#19167

znôrt wrote:

> ericgorr@gmail.com writes:
>> javascript framework to build a fairly simple standalone app. What I
>> mean by standalone is that I will need to be able to copy the app to a
>> machine which does not have a webserver installed and is not connected
>> to the internet.
> 
> just in case you don't know, setting up a webserver is no hassle
> nowadays, there are many tiny free servers you can fire up locally in no
> time, in your case you wouldn't even have to worry about access policies
> or workload. although simple, they provide a fully functional http
> backend which will greatly expand the options available for developing
> your webapp (after all that's how webapps are supposed to work).
> 
> as an example if your app needs some sort of persistent storage, running
> directly off the filesystem will limit the tools at your disposal or
> make it dependent on browser specific functionality.
> 
> as far as UI frameworks go, I would definitely recommend AngularJS.

You have no clue what you are talking about.  You have no idea of the OP's 
requirements.  Why should anyone even consider the humble opinion of an 
address-munging anonymous nobody who cannot even spell properly?

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19168

On Monday, April 8, 2013 5:50:10 PM UTC-4, znôrt wrote:
> ericgorr@... writes:
> 
> 
> 
> > javascript framework to build a fairly simple standalone app. What I
> > mean by standalone is that I will need to be able to copy the app to a
> > machine which does not have a webserver installed and is not connected
> > to the internet.
> 
> just in case you don't know, setting up a webserver is no hassle
> nowadays, there are many tiny free servers you can fire up locally in no
> time, in your case you wouldn't even have to worry about access policies
> or workload. although simple, they provide a fully functional http
> backend which will greatly expand the options available for developing
> your webapp (after all that's how webapps are supposed to work).

Yes, I understand that. But, the requirements for this app require that it be runnable on a machine without a webserver, without an internet connection, and from the desktop by double-clicking on a file such as an index.html.

> as an example if your app needs some sort of persistent storage, running
> directly off the filesystem will limit the tools at your disposal or
> make it dependent on browser specific functionality.

I do not. What I need to do is rather simple:

(1) It is an app that simply displays data. There is no editing. There may be some, limited, sorting.

(2) The data it displays is fixed and will be entirely contained within the app folder. It will never change. However, different installations of the app will contain a different set of data. A single machine may contain multiple installations.

(3) The look and operation of the app is similar to the OS X mail.app. Essentially, there are three columns of data and there will never be any more. The left most column lists the folders contains the files a user wants to view. The middle column displays the files contained within the currently selected folder of the left most column. The rightmost column displays the file currently selected in the middle column.

> as far as UI frameworks go, I would definitely recommend AngularJS.

And, can one setup a standalone app with AngularJS? Is there a tutorial demonstrating how to do this?

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

#19171

In article <fd437754-cb5b-4a0f-9b00-043d6d520548@googlegroups.com>,
 Eric Gorr <ericgorr@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, I understand that. But, the requirements for this app require that it be 
> runnable on a machine without a webserver, without an internet connection, 
> and from the desktop by double-clicking on a file such as an index.html.

So make an index.html file, put it on the desktop, and double-click it. 
It will then open in the user's default browser. Am I missing something? 
It feels to me like you're imagining a difficulty where there is none.

> > as an example if your app needs some sort of persistent storage, running
> > directly off the filesystem will limit the tools at your disposal or
> > make it dependent on browser specific functionality.
> 
> I do not. What I need to do is rather simple:
> 
> (1) It is an app that simply displays data. There is no editing. There may be 
> some, limited, sorting.
> 
> (2) The data it displays is fixed and will be entirely contained within the 
> app folder. It will never change. However, different installations of the app 
> will contain a different set of data. A single machine may contain multiple 
> installations.
> 
> (3) The look and operation of the app is similar to the OS X mail.app. 
> Essentially, there are three columns of data and there will never be any 
> more. The left most column lists the folders contains the files a user wants 
> to view. The middle column displays the files contained within the currently 
> selected folder of the left most column. The rightmost column displays the 
> file currently selected in the middle column.

So it's a file browser (possibly amongst other things). You can't do 
that from JavaScript, AFAIK.

My app has a file browser too. But then I *am* running a webserver, even 
though it only responds to requests from localhost. That allows me to 
use PHP to read the file system and pass what it finds back to the 
JavaScript side.

To make the thing automatic (from the user's PoV), my starting point is 
an AppleScript app (this is under OS X). This double-clickable item runs 
a PHP script, which creates an apache config file on the fly, launches 
apache to use that config file, and then starts a Safari instance with a 
page where all the real work is done. So I can use PHP for the real work 
and JavaScript for the presentational aspects.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

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

#19173

On Monday, April 8, 2013 6:22:48 PM UTC-4, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <fd437754-cb5b-4a0f-9b00-043d6d520548@googlegroups.com>,
> 
>  Eric Gorr <ericgorr@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Yes, I understand that. But, the requirements for this app require that it be 
> 
> > runnable on a machine without a webserver, without an internet connection, 
> 
> > and from the desktop by double-clicking on a file such as an index.html.
> 
> 
> 
> So make an index.html file, put it on the desktop, and double-click it. 
> 
> It will then open in the user's default browser. Am I missing something? 
> 
> It feels to me like you're imagining a difficulty where there is none.
> 
> 
> 
> > > as an example if your app needs some sort of persistent storage, running
> 
> > > directly off the filesystem will limit the tools at your disposal or
> 
> > > make it dependent on browser specific functionality.
> 
> > 
> 
> > I do not. What I need to do is rather simple:
> 
> > 
> 
> > (1) It is an app that simply displays data. There is no editing. There may be 
> 
> > some, limited, sorting.
> 
> > 
> 
> > (2) The data it displays is fixed and will be entirely contained within the 
> 
> > app folder. It will never change. However, different installations of the app 
> 
> > will contain a different set of data. A single machine may contain multiple 
> 
> > installations.
> 
> > 
> 
> > (3) The look and operation of the app is similar to the OS X mail.app. 
> 
> > Essentially, there are three columns of data and there will never be any 
> 
> > more. The left most column lists the folders contains the files a user wants 
> 
> > to view. The middle column displays the files contained within the currently 
> 
> > selected folder of the left most column. The rightmost column displays the 
> 
> > file currently selected in the middle column.
> 
> 
> 
> So it's a file browser (possibly amongst other things). You can't do 
> that from JavaScript, AFAIK.

No, it is not a generic file browser. I am only describing it in the broadest possible terms.

Think about what you would consider to be a report on some topic. This app is simply a report. But, instead of a report containing hundreds of pieces of paper, one can click around to view the content one wants to see.

> To make the thing automatic (from the user's PoV), my starting point is 
> an AppleScript app (this is under OS X). This double-clickable item runs 
> a PHP script, which creates an apache config file on the fly, launches 
> apache to use that config file, and then starts a Safari instance with a 
> page where all the real work is done. So I can use PHP for the real work 
> and JavaScript for the presentational aspects.

Unfortunately, in my case, I cannot count on a webserver being available.

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web