Comments on: Blogger – Can I get in please? http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/ Working together for standards Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:19:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: No Relation» Blog Archive » Can I always use a 100% AJAX Solution? http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-32801 No Relation» Blog Archive » Can I always use a 100% AJAX Solution? Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:57:58 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-32801 [...] - Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut: Ma.gnolia’s case. - Blogger: Can I get in please? - Bloglines is broken! (at least for me) [...] [...] – Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut: Ma.gnolia’s case. – Blogger: Can I get in please? – Bloglines is broken! (at least for me) [...]

]]>
By: Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut - The Web Standards Project http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-9020 Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut - The Web Standards Project Wed, 25 Oct 2006 09:01:20 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-9020 [...] Hopefully you’re all familiar with the phrase in the heading and it’s not some strange quirky British turn of phrase that’s got many of you scratching your heads. It is, though, the perfect phrase for describing what I feel about Ma.gnolia’s sign in screen. It’s not the first time I’ve had issues with over complicated log in pages (complicated in terms of how it’s built) and I dare say it won’t be the last. And just like last time I posted on this topic, I’m expecting that I’ll get comments that will range from "You’re right, this is way over complicating the process - have they not heard of web standards?", through "It’s actually very hard to build sites that use progressive enhancement propely without massive amounts of code forking" to "stop blaming frameworks". But please read on before heading straight to the comments. [...] [...] Hopefully you’re all familiar with the phrase in the heading and it’s not some strange quirky British turn of phrase that’s got many of you scratching your heads. It is, though, the perfect phrase for describing what I feel about Ma.gnolia’s sign in screen. It’s not the first time I’ve had issues with over complicated log in pages (complicated in terms of how it’s built) and I dare say it won’t be the last. And just like last time I posted on this topic, I’m expecting that I’ll get comments that will range from "You’re right, this is way over complicating the process – have they not heard of web standards?", through "It’s actually very hard to build sites that use progressive enhancement propely without massive amounts of code forking" to "stop blaming frameworks". But please read on before heading straight to the comments. [...]

]]>
By: lloydi http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-6369 lloydi Fri, 29 Sep 2006 08:09:50 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-6369 Ah, here we go again ... Bloglines have just updated their service and introduced some Firewall-unfriendly JavaScript, <a href="http://lloydi.com/blog/2006/09/29/bloglines-freedbacking-it-is-broken-now/" rel="nofollow">rendering that service useless at my place of work now</a>. Sigh ... Ah, here we go again … Bloglines have just updated their service and introduced some Firewall-unfriendly JavaScript, rendering that service useless at my place of work now. Sigh …

]]>
By: Blog Standard Stuff » Bloglines Is Broken (for me, at least) http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-6368 Blog Standard Stuff » Bloglines Is Broken (for me, at least) Fri, 29 Sep 2006 08:05:22 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-6368 [...] My browser (Firefox 1.5) has JavaScript enabled and most of the time it works just fine. However, there are circumstances where it will not work. It’s the same kind of scenario that broke access to Blogger for me a while back (please do read through the comments there). But to summarise: [...] [...] My browser (Firefox 1.5) has JavaScript enabled and most of the time it works just fine. However, there are circumstances where it will not work. It’s the same kind of scenario that broke access to Blogger for me a while back (please do read through the comments there). But to summarise: [...]

]]>
By: lillious vaughn http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-482 lillious vaughn Sat, 29 Apr 2006 16:53:34 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-482 I cant access hardly any sites or get kicked out because my browser is not compatable. how do i up grade my browser. what do i do.where do i go and how do i go to a browser window when i dont know where it is. I cant access hardly any sites or get kicked out because my browser is not compatable. how do i up grade my browser. what do i do.where do i go and how do i go to a browser window when i dont know where it is.

]]>
By: hwright.net » Ouch - careful where you put that Ajax http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-481 hwright.net » Ouch - careful where you put that Ajax Sat, 29 Apr 2006 16:45:17 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-481 [...] Ian Lloyd posted about a problem with blogger use from behind a firewall. Seems company websites with strict surfing rules have problem with Ajax that looks like cross-site scripting. I immediately posted the blog to the developers I’m working with. [...] [...] Ian Lloyd posted about a problem with blogger use from behind a firewall. Seems company websites with strict surfing rules have problem with Ajax that looks like cross-site scripting. I immediately posted the blog to the developers I’m working with. [...]

]]>
By: brittany http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-377 brittany Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:28:38 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-377 hey hey

]]>
By: keith http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-316 keith Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:01:19 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-316 I need a browser I need a browser

]]>
By: Isofarro http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-306 Isofarro Sat, 08 Apr 2006 18:09:19 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-306 Ian, you bring up a good point regarding JavaScript development. Just because a function doesn't get called doesn't mean JavaScript is disabled. Its not just JavaScript is enabled or its disabled, but 1.) JavaScript is enabled and the js gets executed 2.) JavaScript is enabled but the JavaScript file doesn't reach the browser 3.) JavaScript is disabled. Blogger can easily solve circumstance 2 by always having a submit button (not stuck inside a noscript element). The company security policy where you work is also part of the problem. I understand why the policy is like that. To be honest, that's not Blogger's problem - but - scenario 2.) can happen in other ways other than a corporate security policy, so it makes sense for Blogger to cater for it. Reminds me of a time when some bright spark decided to filter out all banner ads as part of a corporate security measure. Had the marketing department hitting the roof since there was no way of testing whether the banner ads they'd just paid for were working. The "security measure" lasted for oh, about half-a-day before it was quietly pulled. Ian, you bring up a good point regarding JavaScript development. Just because a function doesn’t get called doesn’t mean JavaScript is disabled. Its not just JavaScript is enabled or its disabled, but

1.) JavaScript is enabled and the js gets executed
2.) JavaScript is enabled but the JavaScript file doesn’t reach the browser
3.) JavaScript is disabled.

Blogger can easily solve circumstance 2 by always having a submit button (not stuck inside a noscript element).

The company security policy where you work is also part of the problem. I understand why the policy is like that. To be honest, that’s not Blogger’s problem – but – scenario 2.) can happen in other ways other than a corporate security policy, so it makes sense for Blogger to cater for it.

Reminds me of a time when some bright spark decided to filter out all banner ads as part of a corporate security measure. Had the marketing department hitting the roof since there was no way of testing whether the banner ads they’d just paid for were working. The “security measure” lasted for oh, about half-a-day before it was quietly pulled.

]]>
By: kebap http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-305 kebap Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:10:48 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2006/04/03/script-blockers-breaking-apps/#comment-305 J R San Juan you are a total idiot! stupid fuck. J R San Juan you are a total idiot! stupid fuck.

]]>