Internet Explorer JavaScript Weirdness

Discussion in 'Javascript' started by Prisoner at War, Apr 11, 2008.

  1. Hi, All:

    I have a JavaScript search engine that always causes MSIE 7 to do a
    top-of-page security "warning" (that top-of-page-bar, and not an
    "alert" [dialog box])...but other websites' JavaScripts do not trigger
    that...what's going on? When I visit other JavaScript sites there's
    no warning and the scripts work fine, but mine (it's still under
    construction, offline) occasions that warning and I have to manually
    allow MSIE to run JavaScript every new session of MSIE....

    Also (nothing to do with JavaScript, but I might as well ask, in case
    it helps any), I have an animated .jpg that refuses to load in MSIE 7
    though Opera 9 and Firefox 2 display that perfectly.


    TIA!!
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 11, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. The "JavaScript" search engine (MSIE 7, like all MSHTML-based UAs, provides
    JScript instead) uses an ActiveX/COM object that is deemed insecure by MSIE
    7. The other sites that you have checked either do not or they are defined
    to be in another Security Zone where less restrictions apply.

    This is no guessing game at all. Post some code or the URL of your search
    engine.

    http://jibbering.com/faq/
    There are no "animated .jpg", unless the resource name suffix is not
    indicative of the file format in your case (bad idea with MSIE). JPEG is
    not an image format that allows animation (short of progressive rendering),
    you have to use GIF89a or MNG for that (alas, the latter only with limited
    support).


    PointedEars
     
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Apr 11, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Well, there's a cookie involved...but that's never been an issue
    before! 'Matter of fact, until I manually turned it off, I was
    getting cookies automatically, while getting that warning from MSIE.
    It's the script over at <http://javascriptkit.com/script/script2/jse/
    index.shtml>...I've only modified it very slightly and don't think
    it's anything I've done...it's rather too long to just post, even if
    only just over fifty lines or so....
    Thanks for the ref...though I didn't notice anything specifically
    relating to MSIE weirdness....
    Sorry, what do you mean "bad idea with MSIE"?? And how could the file
    extension given by the OS itself be misleading??
    But WinXP says "JPEG" for sure!

    ?!?!
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 12, 2008
    #3
  4. Just for the record...my second problem's now solved!

    Turns out that MSIE 7 won't load animation that's been saved as a .jpg
    file, but it will load it when that animation is properly labeled
    the .gif that it is!!

    ?!?!

    Opera 9 and Firefox 2 had no problems....
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 12, 2008
    #4
  5. Prisoner at War

    Evertjan. Guest

    Prisoner at War wrote on 12 apr 2008 in comp.lang.javascript:
    [Please do not toppost on usenet]

    Could be weird, but it is not a javascript issue.

    But thank you for pointing this out to me. ;-)
     
    Evertjan., Apr 12, 2008
    #5
  6. Pardon? I have written "ActiveX/COM object", _not_ "cookie", because the
    former is the most common cause for such a warning message. However, the
    code you are using does not use ActiveX/COM, so you should state what the
    message actually says.
    It was the purpose of this reference that you get yourself informed about
    proper behavior in Usenet in general, and comp.lang.javascript in
    particular. Especially

    http://www.jibbering.com/faq/faq_notes/clj_posts.html

    as referred to there.
    Well, you have found that out for yourself in the meantime.
    Windows Explorer does not use MIME-magic, it relies solely on the filename
    suffix. And so does Internet Explorer.


    PointedEars
     
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Apr 12, 2008
    #6
  7. It's that "to help protect your security, Internet Explorer has
    restricted this webpage from running scripts or ActiveX controls that
    could access your computer..." warning along the top of the screen,
    just underneath the MSIE tabs. Once I click on it and choose "Allow
    Blocked Content" everything works fine.

    But, like I'd said, I was getting cookies automatically from all
    websites before without that warning! But opening my webpage (which
    is offline; I'm still working on it) with the search engine occasions
    that warning for some strange reason -- and now, even stranger, the
    simple image swap below also gets that warning!!

    <img src="something.jpg" id="test" name="test"
    onMouseOver="this.src='nothing.jpg;"
    onMouseOut="this.src='something.jpg';" />
    Ah, okay, thanks...though, you know, I don't like it that even usenet
    posting has "scripting rules!" 9_9
    So strange!! What's the point of a file extension, then, if it can be
    renamed whatever...well, it still behaves as it should, whatever its
    name!
    Okay, thanks again! This is what I hate about computers...the
    stupidest things have to be so precise, but then other things can be
    just whatever! =\
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 12, 2008
    #7
  8. What -- even of myself?!?! ;-)

    Seriously...what's with the top-posting issue?? How come no one tells
    bloggers to not top-post? (Yes I know usenet isn't a blog -- or,
    rather, it's a gigantic public blog -- but I really don't understand
    the logic of this top-posting no-no.)
    And thank Goodness for that! Enough JavaScript issues as it is
    -- ! ;-)
    Glad you found it of interest! This stuff is very strange...it's like
    trying to talk to President Bush...the damned thing just does what it
    wants to do! Why "return false" in one case and "return true" in
    another?? Strange stuff here and there....
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 12, 2008
    #8
  9. Prisoner at War

    Evertjan. Guest

    Prisoner at War wrote on 12 apr 2008 in comp.lang.javascript:
    Answer:It destroys the order of the conversation
    Question: Why?
    Answer: Top-Posting.
    Question: Whats the most annoying thing on Usenet?

    [please do not quote signatures on usenet]
     
    Evertjan., Apr 12, 2008
    #9
  10. (Confirmed for hoverMe accessed via `file:' URI. OMG.)

    Internet Explorer 7 imposes several security restrictions on code loaded
    from `file:' URIs. I presume this is to protect users from malware that
    would not be able to get access to the OS if the OS was properly designed in
    the first place.

    You should test your "offline" Web sites on a local Web server so that you
    can access them with `http:' URIs as you did after they went "online".
    Apache is stable, does not eat much memory, is easy to install, open source,
    free software, and it is for free:

    http://httpd.apache.org/
    That only depends on who writes the OS and the UI, and finally the Web user
    agent. For example, GNU/Linux applications show that filename extensions do
    not need to matter; Firefox shows that resource names do not need to matter,
    even on Windows.


    HTH

    PointedEars
     
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Apr 12, 2008
    #10
  11. Posting is posting. Whom you're quoting (if anyone) is moot.
    Top-posting presents information out-of-order. With Usenet, there's no
    guarantee that everyone's seen previous messages, so they may need to
    read relevant earlier information to set your priceless contribution
    in context. Interleaved posting has been a Usenet convention for more
    than a quarter of a century.
    1. Bloggers are usually posting in a forum they own. Their forum,
    their rules.

    2. Blog postings usually don't quote extensively. (And the ones I've
    seen use in-context, interleaved quoting when they do.)

    3. Teaching a blogger netiquette is surely an even less rewarding task
    than teaching it to a Usenet poster.
    Or, rather, it's not a blog in any way, shape, or form.

    Usenet isn't a web application, so there goes the "b" prefix. There
    are web-to-Usenet gateways (most notably the benighted Google), but
    they're parasitic and wholly unnecessary to Usenet. These days, Usenet
    is mostly carried over NNTP, and back in the Good Old Days before spam
    and AOL and Eternal September it was mostly carried over UUCP
    point-to-point links. (And the s/n ratio was orders of magnitude
    higher, and when someone got Usenet access for the first time they
    were subscribed to news.newusers and given a copy of _Zen and the Art
    of the Internet_ or some other guide.)

    Nor is Usenet a log, so the suffix doesn't apply either. Usenet is a
    convention for formatting and organizing messages, and a collection of
    messages thus formatted and organized and propagated through various
    transports to Usenet nodes. It's not a single forum, it doesn't live
    on a central server or coordinate messages through a gatekeeper, and
    it's administered by convention. It's about as unlike a log as a
    collection of messages could be.
    It's explained in the group's FAQ. Checking the FAQ before asking
    questions is good netiquette. But as you can see, we have a circular
    dependency here.

    Of course, the Usenet convention for interleaved quotation is
    explained in about a million other places as well.

    But in any case, you don't need to understand the reason for it.
    Usenet has been around for about three decades now. It has prevailing
    conventions, and each Usenet group has prevailing conventions as well.
    It's not unreasonable to ask that new posters observe the group,
    learn the conventions, and follow them.
     
    Michael Wojcik, Apr 15, 2008
    #11
  12. Prisoner at War

    Jorge Guest

    <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2004-March/
    040735.html>

    Besides, most email clients invite you to top-post by default.

    --Jorge.

     
    Jorge, Apr 17, 2008
    #12
  13. Prisoner at War

    Evertjan. Guest

    Jorge wrote on 17 apr 2008 in comp.lang.javascript:
    An email client is not primarily intended for usenet,
    and email is not a usenet posting,
    and it does not even mean that it would be the beteer way for email,
    and I my emailclient Pegasus does not invite you so,
    and I doubt your 'most' is true.

    You would not use a bicicle as the golden standard for motorway use,
    or drink your wisky with a fork.

    Usenet newsreaders are optimalized for usenet.

    Answer: Ad nauseam!
    Answer: It destroys the order of the conversation
    Question: Why?
    Answer: Top-Posting.
    Question: Whats the most annoying thing on Usenet?

    ... and the faq shows that this NG adheres to this normal usenet procedure.

    <http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ2_3>
     
    Evertjan., Apr 17, 2008
    #13
  14. You are mistaken. It is a Good Thing of them to place the cursor on top of
    the quote because you should add the salutation there, and read the quote
    from top to bottom while trimming the parts that you are not replying to and
    placing your reply just below the (summarized) parts that you are replying to.

    Users frequently misunderstand this feature as an invitation to write
    everything they are about to write on top of the full quote, with the
    recipient of the message having to go into Batman Mode[tm] in order to
    understand it.

    Besides, NetNews is not e-mail.


    F'up2 poster because I don't know where this would be on-topic in the Big 8.
    Feel free to make a change (as long it does not continue only here).

    PointedEars
     
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Apr 17, 2008
    #14
  15. Why do you believe this is persuasive? McManis offers no substantial
    arguments to support his position; neither is he any sort of authority
    on the subject.
    Usenet is not email.

    The default behavior of poorly-written software does not constitute a
    persuasive argument.

    That's zero for two. Care to try again?
     
    Michael Wojcik, Apr 17, 2008
    #15
  16. Thanks for the ref, but you see how I'm struggling with simple
    JavaScript basics here, too! =(
    Wow, thanks...this was really amusing: "[the] use of spaces often led
    to confusion with novice DOS users, who thought of the "." as part of
    the file's identifier, rather than merely a convention for separating
    the two components of that identifier"...reminds me of the joke about
    customers calling tech support about the "'any' key"....
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 17, 2008
    #16
  17. I've seen that before; what I meant was, so what? What's the big
    deal? Presumably, people having the conversation would have no
    problem following it, and interested third-parties can always look at
    the quote...besides, sometimes it just looks more visually pleasing to
    have a "bottom-heavy" post when the reply is to be only a few lines in
    comparison.
    I really appreciate your help, but I have a philosophical disagreement
    with the notion that a public forum requires its own "law library" and
    "legal procedures"....
    Huh?? What's that about now?? If someone has a signature, why would
    it be bad form for that signature to be included in a quote of his or
    her post???
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 17, 2008
    #17
  18. Yeah, but so do blogs and e-mail.
    LOL! And I'd thought usenet was the pits! =)
    I see "blog," "usenet," "texting," and "world wide web" as instances
    of "informal conversation"...I just don't see the point of MLA/Boswell-
    style rules of publication/debate in this medium...I can't believe I'm
    the only one who thinks this way....
    Well, usenet was started up by academics, I guess, so no surprise that
    it was so insistent on MLA rules of publication and all that
    jazz...but come on, this isn't a scientific journal we're creating;
    it's just passing notes....
    And any analogy will tear if stretched far enough, because analogies
    are meant to compare similar qualities of different things -- and not
    meant to say that one thing is "identical" (in the mathematical sense)
    with another thing.
    I'm sorry, but with all due respect, I cannot follow rules I don't
    believe in (I'm just that kind of person). It seems more visually
    pleasing to place the one or two paragraphs of a response on top of
    the post quoted than to bury it underneath that post if the post is
    rather much longer.

    To me, it's not like you or someone else suddenly can't parse my words
    or your computer shuts down or something if I had top-posted. I
    really don't see the "harm" of top-posting, whereas I see benefits at
    times. To me, it's like the toilet paper roll "controversy" -- under
    or over, it's the same! =)
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 17, 2008
    #18

  19. Just seems natural, doesn't it? I mean, you presume someone is
    following the conversation, so no need to open up with a re-hash of
    the previous week's episode, so to speak! And for those who are just
    tuning in...there's always the Collectors' Edition DVD! ;-)
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 17, 2008
    #19
  20. You can pick apart any comparison with the fury of a JavaScript
    interpreter, but if you know what is meant and everyone else knows,
    where's the harm? Remember, we're not publishing a book here.
    Actually, I say we should -- it's disgusting how everything has been
    designed around cars! Hello, *people* live here!
    Well, one really shouldn't drink alcohol anyway, except maybe as a
    part of some cold medicine....
    And how hard was it to look down to the bottom to see what the
    original statement was? I mean, goodness, let's not start thinking
    like little computers! The whole point of being human is being able
    to make one's own "rules" and live and do as one pleases...top-posting
    is harmless, and annoying only if one wishes to be a "Moslem" about it
    and insist on being ticked off at something that is simply a
    convenience for others....
    Well, I can't say it's a good thing that all this technology only
    makes for more rules and regulations....
     
    Prisoner at War, Apr 17, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.