From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1145 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Wiki for musl? Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:55:18 +0200 Message-ID: <20120614075517.GM17860@port70.net> References: <20120613183956.GL17860@port70.net> <20120613185127.GA29433@intma.in> <408C4093A95A4EF69AB0357291066A7F@lightcubesolutions.com> <20120613195450.GJ163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <29654F593379412DB2311B0EFF7CADAE@lightcubesolutions.com> <20120613200006.GK163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120613230947.GA66841@intma.in> <20120614002140.GL163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120614031006.GB8304@intma.in> <20120614034600.GM163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1339660537 15695 80.91.229.3 (14 Jun 2012 07:55:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 07:55:37 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1146-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Jun 14 09:55:37 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sf4tu-0007d4-R7 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:55:30 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 26485 invoked by uid 550); 14 Jun 2012 07:55:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 26477 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2012 07:55:29 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120614034600.GM163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1145 Archived-At: * Rich Felker [2012-06-13 23:46:00 -0400]: > Just because this is the way broken sites are done doesn't mean it has > to be that way. Suppose instead you do something like this. When the > client sends the submission to the server, the server generates the > updated contact then does a DOM-level diff of the old and new > versions, then sends a representation of the diff across to the > client-side js that incorporates it into the DOM there. > > No ugly duplication, eh? And the ajax code is nearly 100% generic and > site-generic. > i don't like when websites change under my feet i imagine if someone else modifies the page you still get the updates so the page can change while you are reading it.. and the back button does not work anymore then when a proxy modifies the page (eg to remove ads or tidy up the html) then the patching will fail and dom-level diff is not enough anyway: the content can be a huge wall of text which is a single node in the dom i guess, so you need more granularity i'm not sure if this idea is feasible at all