kaeli wrote:
[color=blue]
> In article <40979efa$1@10.10.0.241>,
BrianGenisio@yahoo.com enlightened
> us with...
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>Brian,
>>>
>>>Do you know if this works in most DOM browsers (NN/IE/Opera/Moz) if it
>>>returns a gif?
>>>This is cool. I could use this.
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>>As far as I know, it should. The concept of a server-side dynamic image
>>is not new. PHP, for instance, has a dynamic image library that is real
>>easy to use.
>>
>>As far as the browser knows, it is getting a static image with the query
>>paramaters (after the "?"). The PHP script then returns a GIF, JPEG or
>>PNG image header (instead of "Content-type: text/plain\n\n") and pumps
>>graphic data down.
>>
>>Now, since this is really just a PHP script, with query parameters, you
>>can do anything with it... send it to a database, or whetever.
>>[/color]
>
>
> Very cool.
> I've been wondering about a way to do background data processing for my
> intranet app without using script tags.
> I think this might work.
>
>[color=green]
>>Come to think of it, here is another method I have seen... this one is
>>real easy, since an empty string works:
>>
>><SCRIPT type="text/javascript"
>>src="http://blah.com/junk.php?data=stuff"></SCRIPT>
>>[/color]
>
> I knew that one, but it doesn't work if script is disabled on the
> client.
>
> Hrm, any idea what happens to yours if users choose not to surf with
> images? I know a few people turn off images and some have text browsers,
> like Lynx.
>
> Thanks!
>[/color]
I would guess that the methods would fall apart in Lynx. I also dont
know if images are turned off. I have not used these methods for
background processing... only for dynamic scripts, and dynamic images.
In both cases, if the scripts or images were not turned on, it didnt matter.
B