Re: Proposed FormVariables hierarchy
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2000
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 31584
interpreted = N
texte = On 8/5/2000 9:04, GHulbert@smithmicro.com said:>A proposed new hierarchy might go something like this: > >HTML Form Context (all passed-in form variables, smart [CART], >insecure text vars) > Application Context (things like [VERSION] [DATE] [TIME] >[ELAPSEDTIME], default secure text vars) > Browser Context (things like [IPADDRESS] [REFERRER] [USERNAME] >[PASSWORD]) > template code (your own contexts nested however you decide) > [xxx] <- look for xxx here, and if not found, go up ^^^ > >By adding a second namespace for holding text variables (up in the >HTML Form Context), we can provide a place for storing insecure text >variables. The parser will find secure text variables first, then >form variables, then insecure textvariables. A side-effect would be >that one could have text variables with exactly the same name in both >namespaces, but secure ones would be found first.This looks fine to me, and it sounds like the different name spaces are kept separate, but how would we access the other name spaces? Are they just lost to us? Or will we have something tricky like (for a variable x)
I hate to say it, but ASP's Request.Value(x) is starting to look good...I'd also like to see a more formal distinction between some of the layers, eg form variables are actually more local that insecure variables, so that makes your highest layer actually two layers. Thomas Wedderburn-Bisshop CIO, Woomera Net Solutions www.woomeranet.com.au Sydney, Australia Phone +61 2 9633 5048 fax +61 2 9633 5248 ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to Send administrative queries to
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
On 8/5/2000 9:04, GHulbert@smithmicro.com said:>A proposed new hierarchy might go something like this: > >HTML Form Context (all passed-in form variables, smart [cart], >insecure text vars) > Application Context (things like [version] [date] [time] >[elapsedtime], default secure text vars) > Browser Context (things like [ipaddress] [referrer] [username] >[password]) > template code (your own contexts nested however you decide) > [xxx] <- look for xxx here, and if not found, go up ^^^ > >By adding a second namespace for holding text variables (up in the >HTML Form Context), we can provide a place for storing insecure text >variables. The parser will find secure text variables first, then >form variables, then insecure textvariables. A side-effect would be >that one could have text variables with exactly the same name in both >namespaces, but secure ones would be found first.This looks fine to me, and it sounds like the different name spaces are kept separate, but how would we access the other name spaces? Are they just lost to us? Or will we have something tricky like (for a variable x) I hate to say it, but ASP's Request.Value(x) is starting to look good...I'd also like to see a more formal distinction between some of the layers, eg form variables are actually more local that insecure variables, so that makes your highest layer actually two layers. Thomas Wedderburn-Bisshop CIO, Woomera Net Solutions www.woomeranet.com.au Sydney, Australia Phone +61 2 9633 5048 fax +61 2 9633 5248 ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to Send administrative queries to
Thomas Wedderburn-Bisshop
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
WebCat2 - [format thousands] (1997)
possible, WebCat2.0 and checkboxes-restated (1997)
protect (summer holidays with wcat???) (2000)
same bill to and ship to? (1998)
GuestBook example (1997)
Plugin or CGI or both (1997)
Errata: WCS Newbie question (1997)
E-mailer error codes (1997)
Solve the Problem, get the code! (2001)
[WebDNA] Encryptng a password (2016)
Date and Comparisons (2002)
Re:upgrade problem with users.db (1998)
PSC recommends what date format yr 2000??? (1997)
comparison to Lasso 6 or 7 (2004)
A question about security (1998)
Tried installing Windows beta with no success... (2000)
can WC render sites out? (1997)
WebCat2b15MacPlugin - showing [math] (1997)
Hard Questions ? (1997)
why why why (2004)