how to make html code not visible in firefox

[Harlan Messinger]

Harlan Messinger schreef:


Yup and images wont get displayed if you turn hem of as well

Most people don't turn off images, most images are either unnecessary
for making a site readable, and adequate ALT text can be written to
substitute for most of the rest. Conversely, many people turn off
Javascript for good reasons, and that doesn't keep most sites from
displaying. If a site owner wants his to be one of those sites that
can't even be seen without Javascript, that's up to him, but to me it
seems a questionable choice.

 

[dorayme]

It is clearly futile since you can't send someone unencrypted plain text
and expect that they won't be able to look at it. And you must
necessarily do so if you want someone to look at your web page. Silly is
a value judgement I admit, but I stand by it. I think it's silly to
want something that is self contradictory.

This just looks plain like missing the point. No sane person is
going to try to publish a web page while trying to hide it too.
But someone might want to hide the markup, the tags, the css
sheet etc.

Plus "silly" is not a value judgement in the way you might be
meaning. At least not in any sense that you need to "stand by" a
judgement in this case. That it is silly for a sane person to
believe in an obvious and open contradiction is a fact!

 

[Kevin Scholl]

substitute for most of the rest. Conversely, many people turn off
Javascript for good reasons, and that doesn't keep most sites from
displaying.

Just to satisfy my devil's advocacy, could you provide examples of these
so-called "good reasons"? I have yet to see a truly viable "good reason"
for turning off Javascript. Most reasons to date involve 1) confusion
with Java, 2) some supposed security risk (often ActiveX controls
mistaken for JS), 3) "somebody told me..." nonsense, or 4) stopping
popups. The only one of these with any real merit was 4, but even that
is antiquated given the specialized popup blockers in modern browsers.

--

*** Remove the DELETE from my address to reply ***

======================================================
Kevin Scholl http://www.ksscholl.com/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Arjen]

Harlan Messinger schreef:

Most people don't turn off images, most images are either unnecessary
for making a site readable, and adequate ALT text can be written to
substitute for most of the rest.

Hi

You seem to have missed the ''

Conversely, many people turn off

Javascript for good reasons, and that doesn't keep most sites from
displaying. If a site owner wants his to be one of those sites that
can't even be seen without Javascript, that's up to him, but to me it
seems a questionable choice.

Op wanted to hide his source code .. this is a way to do it. There are
good ways to make a page hybrid enough for people that dont have js
enabled. I never said it was a good idea dough.

Arjen

 

[Ed Mullen]

This just looks plain like missing the point. No sane person is
going to try to publish a web page while trying to hide it too.
But someone might want to hide the markup, the tags, the css
sheet etc.

This pre-supposes that Web pages are only published by sane persons. I
find that to be a wholey falacious presumption. Hey, there are an awful
lotta nuts out there! And they are publishing pages at an alarming rate!!!

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
For Sale: Parachute. Only used once, never opened, small stain.

 

[dorayme]

This pre-supposes that Web pages are only published by sane persons. I
find that to be a wholey falacious presumption. Hey, there are an awful
lotta nuts out there! And they are publishing pages at an alarming rate!!!

Ed, I don't presuppose that.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Ed, I don't presuppose that.

Excellent! Then (I think) we both are pre-supposing that insanity is
either the norm, or it is largely prevalent, when it comes to the design
of Web pages. Goodie! I really like it when we extraterrestrials can
agree! The world needs more of such inter-racial-inter-celestial
communication. And, frankly, at least based on your missives, Mars
seems to me to be much more advanced in understanding inter-species
relationships and communications. Although, you do have that whole
"water-centric" thing. Geez. Whuzzup wid dat? I mean, don't you have,
like, canals, and all?

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
We win justice quickest by rendering justice to the other party. -
Mohandas Gandhi

 

[dorayme]

dorayme said and then Ed said and then dorayme said and then
Ed said and so on, who can count these things?:

Excellent! Then (I think) we both are pre-supposing that
insanity is either the norm, or it is largely prevalent, when
it comes to the design of Web pages.

Ed, stop a second! I don't even presuppose this. But true that it
can be prevalent or even very widespread in limited fields (take
religion for instance...)

Goodie! I really like it when we extraterrestrials can
agree! The world needs more of such
inter-racial-inter-celestial communication. And, frankly, at
least based on your missives, Mars seems to me to be much more
advanced in understanding inter-species relationships and
communications. Although, you do have that whole
"water-centric" thing. Geez. Whuzzup wid dat? I mean, don't
you have, like, canals, and all?

so... you are not from earth either?

 

[Ed Mullen]

Ed, stop a second! I don't even presuppose this. But true that it
can be prevalent or even very widespread in limited fields (take
religion for instance...)

Err, well,ok. But, I kinda thought we were converging here. If not
linguistically, perhaps, at least, well, in some Web-like fashion.

so... you are not from earth either?

Earth? Geez, no. I'm still searching for my origins. Mom and Dad were
more than dodgey about it. Very evasive. Uttering phrases like:
"Honey, we're all /people/." And, "The scales on your skin don't make a
difference!" Or, "Well, look, I know those Polish people don't
understand pasta, but, well, ok, just consider them challenged and try
to befriend and educate them!"

Of course, the biggie for me growing up was: "Oh, honey, someday you'll
meet a girl who actually appreciates that aspect of your anatomy!"

And you know what? Mom was right! I finally met her! Ok, well, I had
to get over a few things (anatomically speaking) but, whoa! What a dame!

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).

 

[dorayme]

Ed, stop a second! I don't even presuppose this. But true that it
can be prevalent or even very widespread in limited fields (take
religion for instance...)

Err, well,ok. But, I kinda thought we were converging here. If not
linguistically, perhaps, at least, well, in some Web-like fashion.[/QUOTE]

Yes, lets suppose a web-like agreement then... <g>

 

[Ed Mullen]

Err, well,ok. But, I kinda thought we were converging here. If not
linguistically, perhaps, at least, well, in some Web-like fashion.

Yes, lets suppose a web-like agreement then... <g>
[/QUOTE]

So, you have, like my father, web-footed toes?

And, like, my dog of many years ago, as well. He swam very well, in
lakes and seas. Well, once he got beyond the notion that water moved.
He was pretty shocked by that on first encounter with the oceans of
Earth, having only, there-to-fore, been acquainted with lakes and other
still bodies of water.

It occurs to me also that you might have an uncanny ability to detect
upcoming storms as our dog did. Do you have that extra-sensorial
ability? If so, you may want to contact the US Naval Observatory. They
may want to pay handsomely for such skills.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
If a man stands in the middle of the forest speaking and there is no
woman around to hear him, is he still wrong?

 

[Ed Seedhouse]

No sane person is
going to try to publish a web page while trying to hide it too.
But someone might want to hide the markup, the tags, the css
sheet etc.

Which latter is exactly equivalent to hiding the web page! The web page
is these things.

 

[dorayme]

Which latter is exactly equivalent to hiding the web page! The web page
is these things.

Take a look at a web page in a browser. Then take a look at View
Source. See the difference? No ifs and buts... do you see the
difference with your eyes? Yes? Right. That is all that I am
referring to.

And the argument now is very simple, if A has a property that B
does not have, A cannot be B. And there are many properties - ah
ah! Ed! No ifs and buts, look! - that are obviously different, in
the two (note "two") windows, the browser and the source text.

 

[Harlan Messinger]

Just to satisfy my devil's advocacy, could you provide examples of these
so-called "good reasons"? I have yet to see a truly viable "good reason"
for turning off Javascript. Most reasons to date involve 1) confusion
with Java, 2) some supposed security risk (often ActiveX controls
mistaken for JS),

You're confusing "real" with "supposed". As for ActiveX objects, one of
the things Javascript is used for is to script those objects.

3) "somebody told me..." nonsense, or 4) stopping

 

[Harlan Messinger]

Harlan Messinger schreef:

Hi

You seem to have missed the ''

I did, sorry.

 

[Kevin Scholl]

You're confusing "real" with "supposed". As for ActiveX objects, one of
the things Javascript is used for is to script those objects.

I'm not confusing anything. The problem lies with the ActiveX controls
and the security risk that some of them contain, not with the
Javascript. Javascript is itself inherently secure.

By your reasoning, one could say that a car is a risk. A car in and of
itself is not a risk, being nothing more than a collection of inert
pieces working together a machine. Introduce a faulty driver, and you
now have a risk.

3) "somebody told me..." nonsense, or 4) stopping

--

*** Remove the DELETE from my address to reply ***

======================================================
Kevin Scholl http://www.ksscholl.com/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[John Hosking]

Just to satisfy my devil's advocacy, could you provide examples of these
so-called "good reasons"? I have yet to see a truly viable "good reason"
for turning off Javascript. Most reasons to date involve 1) confusion
with Java, 2) some supposed security risk (often ActiveX controls
mistaken for JS), 3) "somebody told me..." nonsense, or 4) stopping
popups. The only one of these with any real merit was 4, but even that
is antiquated given the specialized popup blockers in modern browsers.

Some sites (including, but not limited to adult sites) try to do a lot
of tricks like popping up windows on close or Back (I guess you
mentioned that), hiding or changing the link text in the status bar,
preventing use of the secondary mouse button (right-click), or showing a
fancy but inevitably annoying custom cursor, like for instance a string
of letters that follow me as I try to mouse around the page. Yick.

The best reason for me, though (because it affects so many more sites),
is that turning off JavaScript saves me from having to see so many
Google ads. This is a great Web-beautification feature, since most pages
look so much better without that crap (and I don't have to wait while it
loads).

Wishing you and the others in alt.html a merry Christmas.

-- John

 

[Bergamot]

Just to satisfy my devil's advocacy, could you provide examples of these
so-called "good reasons"? I have yet to see a truly viable "good reason"
for turning off Javascript.

FWIW, I have JS disabled by default. I find most uses of JS to be
annoying rather than "engaging" or otherwise useful, so enable it only
when absolutely necessary. Ditto Flash.

 

[Joel Shepherd]

And the argument now is very simple, if A has a property that B
does not have, A cannot be B.

So, a cat is a mammal, with specific attributes that not all mammals
have. Same for a llama. A cat is not a llama. But are you saying that a
cat is not a mammal? Or that anywhere a mammal is required, neither a
cat nor a llama will do? By your very simple definition, that would seem
to be the case.

And there are many properties - ah
ah! Ed! No ifs and buts, look! - that are obviously different, in
the two (note "two") windows, the browser and the source text.

Well ... yeah. What of it?

 

[Ed Seedhouse]

Take a look at a web page in a browser.

You are splitting the world's finest hair! What you see in the browser
you will not see unless the page code is available to your computer.

Gimme a break....