cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Wechner <>
Subject Re: Wyona / Xopus (IE vs.Mozilla)
Date Mon, 11 Mar 2002 11:13:17 GMT
Hi Lon, nice seeing you here:-)

Where does Laurens post the functional specification for Xopus?

All the best


Lon Boonen wrote:

> >>"Robert S. Koberg" wrote:
> >>I thought Xopus uses an ActiveX to control the editing.
> >>No, it's everything javascript based (with calls to MSXML)
> >>I could not even see their pagesbecause I don't not browse the 
> internet with them on anymore
> >>(especiallysites made by guys like you :)
> >>Exactly, ActiveX is potentially too dangerous but no, they don't 
> usethis technology and nobody is
> >>planning to use it.
> >Well, no, Xopus is actually using a little bit ActiveX, but just for 
> the Autosave mechanismn.
> >The rest is Javascript and MSXML.
> I am sorry! I totally forgot the FileSystemObject we are 
> instantiating. That is because I never saw the auto-save feature as 
> being part of Xopus.
> What I meant was that we NEVER build any ActiveX. But some of the 
> standard Windows ActiveX components are used by use. The autosave 
> function uses FileSystemObject, which obviously is a VERY dangerous 
> component since it has virtually unrestricted access to your harddisk.
> >But for professional authoring and editing you definitely need an 
> autosave function.
> >("Newspaper editors" just dont't use the save (in between) button. I 
> think
> >they actually ignore it on purpose:-)
> I agree.
> In IE5.5 we could save a draft into a supercookie (up to 640KB is 
> supported this way!).
> Netscape would be a problem though (as always).
> I will tell Laurens, who is writing the Functional Specification for 
> the new Xopus, to include this feature.
> >One last general remark:
> >I think all of you are too much concentrated on how to implement this 
> stuff technically.
> >It is actually already implemented! Maybe not too good and not on 
> Mozilla.
> >What I want to say is, that we should more focuse on functional 
> specifications, which
> >certainly doesn't forbid to vote on fixing bugs (which I did), but 
> which will be the
> >foundation for the implementation.
> I agree even more.
> So! Tell us. What functionalities do you want in the next Xopus?
> Lon, Q42

View raw message