We have a browser based application written in PHP in which I want to drag-n-drop files from the windows explorer or directly email attachments(this would be very cool). On dropping the files in the browser application, it should save it on a particular folder on the server. Any help on how this can be achieved would be really appreciated.
JS or HTML5 would seem to be your best bets. But I have had trouble with d&d in MSIE (FF was ok). The downside is that HTML is not scheduled to be finalized until 2022(!) - you can expect support before then (even today), but it may not be consistent.
There is a good HTML demo here http://ljouanneau.com/lab/html5/demodragdrop.html
This will also allow you to d&d stuff from the browser to the PC (bi-directional)
I don't do JS so can't help you there, sorry (I'm a PHP guy too ;-)
Related
For example, we have a cool styled website, can we use developer options(f12) from browser to snatch this?
Ignoring any legal / copyright implications, you can grab the client-side code this way, yes. All HTML, CSS, JavaScript and imagery can be seen through the F12 Developer Tools.
However, there is no way to know what server-side code a website is using (outside of the server owner themselves configuring something incorrectly and thereby exposing that information).
The answer from Obsidian Age is a good one. I'm going to add some more information that may be useful to you.
I've used this technique myself of getting source code via the developer window. Usually I want to find out how they did some neat CSS or JS trick so that I can try it in my own apps.
The files that make up a website such as HTML, JavaScript, and CSS you can find in the Network tab and can easily copy these.
However you should know the JS, CSS, and even (sometimes to a degree) the HTML files have been minimized and are typically missing any comments from the original developers. Chrome has a nice feature that will un-compress JS files and you can even set break points and step through the JS code.
I successfully (with much frustration) got our c# embedded signing to work on our site, however, that was before I tested with Safari on a Mac. Safari does not allow Third party sites to open in an iframe without already having a cookie for that site stored. If you either open the site beforehand or allowing all cookies, the document will show embedded. However, even messing around with that, the redirection after completion is not working. The please wait popup does not redirect back to my site. I am looking for any embedded solution that supports mac.
The process works great on windows, but does not work on Safari for Mac and is intermittent with Firefox and Chrome on mac.
I am looking for any non-iFrame embedded solutions that I could implement that should work on all platforms and browsers.
Since you have embedding working in terms of generating a URL token, it's up to you how to access that URL. We've seen developers write their own programs to view where they have complete control over the iFrame and can do whatever they like with it, and another solution we've seen is to use a web browser control.
see this SO link
The only workaround that I know of is to pop up a new browser window. I know there is work being done to make it work without cookies, but at this time the new browser window is your only choice.
Sorry about that.
Firstly let me state that I have zero experience with Sharepoint so this may be a pretty stupid question.
I started a new job yesterday and part of the induction is viewing the company literature via their Sharepoint portal. I've noticed that whenever I try to access an embedded PDF link via Chrome it seems like it's a broken link and appears to do a Google search instead. Yet when I try the exact same steps using IE all works as expected.
I don't want to raise this with my boss if it's going to make me look a little stupid! Is there some cross browser issue with PDF links?
Thanks.
Darren, try flushing the cache in Chrome, and if necessary, log off and log back into your computer. We've had the same problem with Chrome and Google doesn't seem to be fixing the problem (although they might point the finger back at Microsoft).
Yes I have the same issue with Chrome and Firefox
Sharepoint is optimized for IE and vice versa
You also can't open Files with the "Check in and Check out" functionality because only IE is able to do that from Sharepoint (Other Browsers will just Download the File)
You can try using AddOns like IE-Tab
(simply uses the IE algorithms within FF and Chrome for specific Sites)
But its better to use Sharepoint with IE
Is there any good browser based WebDAV client? If not, is it possible to make one?
Look at the AjaxFileBrowser from ITHit. Pretty slick, and has FireFox & Chrome PUT support for uploading. IE, drag-and-drop from your desktop to the browser. They have a fully functional demo site up at http://www.ajaxbrowser.com.
There's a plugin for Firefox which handles WebDAV.
Webfolders is a firefox extension that gives you the ability to view the contents of WebDAV
servers in the browser and use the full functionality of the WebDAV protocol.
Depends on what you expect the client to do, and whether you're looking for a cross-browser "web application", or a browser extension.
The main issue with doing this in a "web application" (as opposed to a browser extension) is (1) the lack of binary data support in Javascript, and (2) the lack of access to the local file system (which of course is a security feature).
There is webdav-js which can be enabled as a bookmarklet or served by the WebDAV server itself as an HTML page.
It supports the regular listing of files and directories, file upload, directory creation, renaming, as well as in-page display of images and other media.
If by browser based you mean that it runs in html (ie you don't want your users to install a plugin) then the answer is partly yes and mostly no.
Partly yes, because I have built and used one. It uses the jquery jtree plugin to display folders, and selecting a folder node populates a file list in the right hand panel. Panels are done with another jquery plugin, and the file list is made dynamic with the jquery datatables plugin.
But I think for you the answer is probably "no". Thats because for the browser to use webdav is must user webdav "methods" like PROPFIND and MKCOL. These methods just arent supported in most browsers, so your javascript can't use them directly. I have a server-side mapping in my webdav server project which allows my javascript to use normal GET and POST methods, and these requests are transformed on the server to webdav methods.
I said "probably no" for you since this serve side mapping isnt standard, its a part of milton. But if you happen to use milton, or you can use milton, then its all good.
Try SMEStorage.com. They turn any WebDav back-end into a personal cloud file solution. As well as a rich browser desktop and mobile client, there are clients for Mac,Windows, Linux and Mobile clients for Android, iOS, Windows Phone, and BlackBerry.
I'm tyring to get phonegap up and running on blackberry storm (9530 simulator). I had been testing my webapp from withing BB's built in browser, and it was looking ok, but then it totally bit once I tried to look at the some code from within phonegap, even though I was pointing phonegap to the same url (I hadn't yet gotten to the point of running code locally on the device).
I tried a test case on google and got similiar results. see below. I suspect that I'm missing something basic here. I would have expect both images to be nearly identical.
Browser
http://www.eleganttechnologies.com/outside/ImgDeviceBB9530WebGoogle.jpg
Phonegap
http://www.eleganttechnologies.com/outside/ImgDeviceBB9530PgGoogle.jpg
[Update]
To shed some light on what is happening, I ran the browser and the embedded browser (phonegap) against the W3 mobile web acid test: http://www.w3.org/2008/06/mobile-test/
I definitely notice differences between the two, but I don't yet know the 'why' and the 'how-to-address'.
Acid via built-in browser
(source: eleganttechnologies.com)
BTW - I ran this earlier today and got a couple more green square than just now.
Acid via browser embedded into phonegap
http://www.eleganttechnologies.com/outside/ImgDeviceBb9530PgAcid.jpg
Disclaimer: I don't know anything about phonegap, but have a pretty good theory. By default the embedded browser control on BlackBerry uses an older version of the rendering engine than the BlackBerry browser itself does.
At the BlackBerry developer conference last year, a talk was given about this, and there's an undocumented option to use the newer rendering engine. \
The option ID is 17000 (yes, a magic number, which could change, use at your own risk etc), and should be set to true. Not sure how you'd pass this option through phonegap (I'm not familiar with the toolkit) but using the BlackBerry APIs it's something like:
BrowserContent content;
...
content.getRenderingOptions().setProperty(RenderingOptions.CORE_OPTIONS_GUID, 17000, true);
I don't know the specifics of the browsers you are using, but I do know that most of the big sites will detect your OS + browser combination to decide what HTML to show you.
If Google is seeing a different user agent, you might get a generic mobile version of the HTML instead os the Blackberry specific HTML you get for the built in browser.
If you have access to a web server, try hitting it with both browser setups and see if there is any difference in the log file. That might tell you something interesting.
As we can see in your Acid tests...
One browser (the built-in one) is reporting correctly as a BlackBerry9530, and the other (phonegap) is not presenting the user-agent ["Testing with ."].
In this case, Google is providing you with the default view of their homepage, whereas when you are reporting yourself as a BlackBerry device, you will get the BlackBerry specific rendering.
By the sounds of things, using phonegap is removing the default user-agent (most probably because it's not recognising your device). As phonegap is open-source, the best bet is to get in there, and debug it and find out what happens with the user-agent when the http requests leave the device and track it back from there.
Maybe one browser has capabilities that another one does not?
Hm. By looking at the screenshot I would say that the second page is probably missing some resources. It may be missing some images, scripts and the CSS files, which would explain different l&f. Knowing how Blackberry Browser Field API works, I would guess that the implementation that uses the BrowserField was not done correctly. Just my guess. In addition to that, when the browser field is initialized the caller needs to configure it properly by enabling the appropriate browser features - scripts, styles etc. Again, the API is done in a very weird way, I have gotten myself into this trap once. When setting the options, you cannot just create one mask (like CSS | WML | SCRIPT) and make one call. Options are numeric and, I believe, non-overlapping - but you still need to call the API for setting each option independently.
Also the way asynchronous loading of the resources for BrowserField takes time to understand.
Just my $0.02.