W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-email-discuss@w3.org > March 1999

Re: Suggestions for www4mail next patch

From: Steve Song <ssong@idrc.ca>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:51:26 -0500
Message-Id: <4.1.19990310103523.00a70100@internet.idrc.ca>
To: www4mail-comments@w3.org
Hi Clement,

At 10:27 AM 99/03/10 , www-email-discuss-request@w3.org wrote:
>Okay, I have three reasons for shying away from this getweb form
>filling problem:
>1. Some pull down lists are over 100 items (E.g list of countries).
>	(This means adding 100 extra lines to the page ??) or ignoring the
>		such items???)

I am not sure that this is a big deal.  People who like the getweb style
forms are used to dealing with long lists of options.  I don't think that
this is the best way to fill in forms but it makes an excellent back stop
for those people who have trouble making the email / browser combination
work together.   Having just come back from a month long trip through
eastern and southern Africa, I have met many researchers still using
Windows 3.1,  or Pegasus Mail for DOS, or Fidonet systems, etc.  This is
the most compelling reason from my point of view for supporting an email
only alternative.

>2. One has to write code to support each type of HTML tag, if some new
>	tag appears tomorrow, you have to code again. Using the current
>	browser method, a new TAG means that the USER should get a new
>	browser and not the Administrator getting a new server software.

Didn't think of that.  What about using a separate tags.cfg file that could
be updated separately or individually?

>3. I did not get any encouraging response to my earlier question on the
>	need for such a system.

Really?   This has been the most frequently received user request for us.
Perhaps because we ran getweb for over a year before www4mail.

>So the solution I have in mind is to make public the above syntax, this
>means that the user has to extract the FORM syntax from the source web
>page himself...:-).
>Provide a command for the USER to select that the reply should be in the
>GET or tsource format and  I was thinking of having a XJSDUMP command (A
>javascript program that will dump the www4mail DATA syntax to the BROWSER

Well, naturally its your call.  It's easy to make work for other people and
even if you never lifted another finger to www4mail, you will have made a
substantial and significant contribution to the cause of email based access
to the web.  So, you need to interpret my comments in the context of "in a
perfect world it would be nice if....".  ;-)

Having said that, I suspect your alternative solution may be a little too
complex for the average user to wrap their minds around. 

Cheers... Steve

>I look forward to your comments...
>Clement Onime
> On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Steve Song wrote:
>> Clement,
>> Your list looks excellent.  I have only one other item that I would put on
>> the wish list and it's a big one.  You may disagree with me on it..... ;-)
>>  but I think that for true user flexibility, it would be great to allow
>> getweb style form-filling as well as the existing browser based form 
>> Cheers.... steve
>> At 07:06 AM 99/03/10 , www-email-discuss-request@w3.org wrote:
>> >
>> >Dear,
>> >I am trying to compile a list for the next www4mail patch
>> >
>> >1. Allow END Tag or Command
>> >	end and a few other tags E.g --
>> >
>> >2. Allow autodetection of MIME-TYPE for the get or send command
>> >	(right now www4mail assumes text/plain for get or send)
>> >
>> >3. Allow Users to select That FORM replies should arrive as 
>> >	get or tsource..
>> >
>> >4. Smarter IP blocking
>> >	www4mail should try to look up the name of the IP address,
>> >	test the name and if the name fails then restrict the site
>> >	otherwise answer the request.
>> >
>> >5. Smarter HELP/COmment system
>> >	E.g split messages should carry a comment about re-combining
>> >	split parts.
>> >	Suggest decoder programs based on MIME type ???
>> >
>> >	Allow context sensitive help
>> >	E.g help XURLCODE or help GETPART , etc...
>> >
>> >6. Option to allow users turn off mail splitting
>> >
>> >7. Check for duplicate frame entries
>> >
>> >8. Additional check for X-RATED sites, via the 
>> >	META Keywords header
>> >
>> >Any additions and suggestions or comments or code ;-) are welcomed.
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >Clement Onime
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Steve Song <ssong@idrc.ca>
>> Unganisha (Connectivity) Project <http://www.idrc.ca/unganisha>
>> International Development Research Centre
>> P.O. Box 8500, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1G 3H9
>> Tel. +1 613 236 6163 x2268  Fax +1 613 567 7748

Steve Song <ssong@idrc.ca>
Unganisha (Connectivity) Project <http://www.idrc.ca/unganisha>
International Development Research Centre
P.O. Box 8500, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1G 3H9
Tel. +1 613 236 6163 x2268  Fax +1 613 567 7748
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 1999 10:51:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:29 UTC