![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyway, I repeat myself, your "need" is only due to a illogical slavery on your part to your library. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
Because a 3rd party server library requires it for processing just as it looks completed on the client browser. |
#13
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
|
|
Anyway, I repeat myself, your "need" is only due to a illogical slavery on your part to your library. |
|
This is not an illogical slavery. The library is GREAT. |
|
Everybody is |
|
hung up on why I want to do this and not the how. DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW??? |
|
The why, is I want to construct an archival image of the view a user sees in a client browser. |
|
This library can be used to construct an encrypted page view image while maintaining inner data and it is easily renderable while encrypted by most browsers. |
|
The archival image will be used as a legal construct to document what a user saw in the browser and may be used in court. |
|
Web sites do not come from a single server so reconstructing what the server serves is inappropriate as the client view may get content from dozens of servers to build a single client view. |
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
MC wrote on 16 jun 2008 in comp.lang.javascript: Anyway, I repeat myself, your "need" is only due to a illogical slavery on your part to your library. [please do not quote signatures on usenet] This is not an illogical slavery. The library is GREAT. Wow, GREAT if you say so! I do not believe so. That just means you are a willing slave to that greatness. Everybody is I wouldn't think everybody, as you did not ask or hear evrybody. Are you a man or woman of superlatives? hung up on why I want to do this and not the how. DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW??? You cannot do this and you should not want to do this. Wanting to do what is impossible is nice, but not productive. The why, is I want to construct an archival image of the view a user sees in a client browser. 1 html does only approximately show how different browsers, different sizes and different OS'es show a window. 2 html is available on the server and can be directly taken from the server by xmlhttp. 3 html does not show the changes made to the DOM on the browser. [I wrote all these arguments before in this thread] This library can be used to construct an encrypted page view image while maintaining inner data and it is easily renderable while encrypted by most browsers. Impossible, if you mean "image" like most of us do. What is "inner data", html being html? What is "renderable" in the sense of a browser, a browser does not render html, as html is the source as far as the browser is concerned? What browser "encripts" the html? Or do you mean parsing the html source to the DOM? The archival image will be used as a legal construct to document what a user saw in the browser and may be used in court. You must have a very naive judge to believe such. Web sites do not come from a single server so reconstructing what the server serves is inappropriate as the client view may get content from dozens of servers to build a single client view. Could be true, but that is immaterial, only using clientside in-browser javascript scripting. You would need to conserve a screenview or a windowview, quite possible with a seperate programme, but not just with browser scripting. And even so, such view can be easily manipulated, so would not do for juridical proof. ======================================== Remember you asked: "How do I get HTML sent to server?" [Which server, btw, since now you stipulate several servers?] And not: "How do I send a screenview to the server ?" And I showed "sending html to a server" to be inappropriate for conserving the view the user has seen on his or her screem. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) |
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
"MC" <mica[removethis]@aisus.com> writes: Because a 3rd party server library requires it for processing just as it looks completed on the client browser. Sending the HTML won't give you that. It only gives you the structure of the HTML, not what it *looks* like when displayed in a browser. For that, you need a screenshot. If you insist on converting the page's document structure back to HTML and send that back to the server (including user-entered values in form controls), you'll have to traverse the DOM structure and build the HTML. The non-standard innerHTML property only reads the original value of input controls (i.e., "inputControl.originalValue", not the currently entered value, "inputControl.value"). I.e., it misses the user entered values. This means that the HTML you generate is not what is currently being shown, but *your* conversion of the DOM objects into a text representation. If you are doing that anyway, why not just send the values and build the structure on the server side. Or, if you really, really need to be sure what the user sees, accept his values as a normal form submit, and then generate a bitmap image displaying those values along with a secret word, and have the user submit the secret word to confirm that he agrees with the data in the image. That way you know what image was displayed, and that he can see images. /L -- Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lrn (AT) hotpop (DOT) com DHTML Death Colors: URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html 'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.' |
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
The why, is I want to construct an archival image of the view a user sees in a client browser. This library can be used to construct an encrypted page view image while maintaining inner data and it is easily renderable while encrypted by most browsers. The archival image will be used as a legal construct to document what a user saw in the browser and may be used in court. Web sites do not come from a single server so reconstructing what the server serves is inappropriate as the client view may get content from dozens of servers to build a single client view. |
#17
| |||||
| |||||
|
|
This is not helping and its not constructive. |
|
Yes, the main html is served by a single page but the inner content may come from dozens of servers. |
|
We are trying our best to approximate and document the client view. |
|
And yes, I can construct an encrypted image that is comprised of data elements using this library. I don't care if you have a problem with that. |
|
The how is what I am interested in. It seems that if you can't offer a solution, then the problem is criticized. I thought pointy ears was the only one being unfriendly in that manner here. |
#18
| |||
| |||
|
|
The problem is that the browser - any browser - does _not_ have access to the HTML source used to render the current page. Yes, sounds crazy. Yes, anyone can click View > Page Source or equivalent to see the source: anyone can but browser cannot. What browser can "see" is the DOM Tree resulted from the parsing algorithms and error correction mechanics of this particular browser applied to the server HTML source. Respectively by getting document.documentElement.innerHTML (the whole page) or document.body.innerHTML (body only) you are not getting the original source. Instead the browser is "reverse engineering" for you the current DOM Tree into some HTML code which is, being reused by this particular browser, should result to a copy of the current DOM Tree which is by itself is a browser-specific result of parsing the original HTML source. |
#19
| ||||||
| ||||||
|
|
Anyway, I repeat myself, your "need" is only due to a illogical slavery on your part to your library. Evertjan, This is not an illogical slavery. The library is GREAT. Everybody is hung up on why I want to do this and not the how. |
|
DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW??? |
|
The why, is I want to construct an archival image of the view a user sees in a client browser. |
|
This library can be used to construct an encrypted page view image |
|
while maintaining inner data and it is easily renderable while encrypted by most browsers. The archival image will be used as a legal construct to document what a user saw in the browser and may be used in court. |
|
Web sites do not come from a single server so reconstructing what the server serves is inappropriate as the client view may get content from dozens of servers to build a single client view. |
#20
| |||
| |||
|
|
"MC" <mica[removethis]@aisus.com> writes: |
|
The non-standard innerHTML property only reads the original value of input controls (i.e., "inputControl.originalValue", not the currently entered value, "inputControl.value"). I.e., it misses the user entered values. This means that the HTML you generate is not what is currently being shown, but *your* conversion of the DOM objects into a text representation. If you are doing that anyway, why not just send the values and build the structure on the server side. |
|
/L -- Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - l... (AT) hotpop (DOT) com |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |