On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:41:52 +0300, Mithgol the Webmaster wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jan 2002 15:58:19 -0400 Clarence Verge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Perhaps you would like to contribute in the form of a minimal >> js masquerade engine ? > Sounds good. Let's discuss what should it be. I am busy right now, but > in early February I'll think about making a standalone DOS16 executable > (.EXE) JavaScript preparser (with open source code Turbo Pascal 5.5/6.0 > .PAS) - a program which parses original HTML and makes one of the > following: > 1) .ASF with a single URL where Arachne should go to > 2) .HTM, free of JavaScript, which Arachne should browse > but this tends to be not so fast solution, since it needs an external APM > helper instead of plug-in engine. They end up being the same thing. Whether the external is faster or slower will depend on the type of code. > But it will do masqerade, since most guardian > JS will either send a browser to another MSIE-only page via JS or change a > hidden value in a certain form. Excellent !! > But. You should give me several examples of websites where Arachne should > masquerade; the browser detection methods DO vary. I'll invent the most > common and quick masquerade solution for each. Hmmm. If i were to guess, I think those specific examples will come in the form of complaints after the initial release. <g> > Or describe a DOM component, if you agree with the following. >> Lacking that, how about creating a document describing each of >> the most important and absolute minimum js functions listing the >> form of the function call and a description of the required >> MINIMUM action ? >> Please don't suggest I/we review the standard ourselves. Do you >> want to contribute ? > I won't suggest that. I can make a complete list, but JavaScript is an > object-oriented language and its function calls may address to some DOM > (Document Object Model), which may include (but is not limited to) the > following browser-detection functions: > *) automatic navigation through pages in Arachne history or sending > Arachne to a new URL > *) content read/written in forms > *) new string or numeric objects created in memory > *) new HTML code written in the place where SCRIPT tag is placed; this > code may also include SCRIPT tags, so it needs a recursive interpreter > *) external java scripts downloaded from Internet and interpreted All fine and reasonable except maybe the first. I can think of lots of reasons why it can't/might not work. And we might not WANT it to work. >> Forget complete js support for now - it is NOT going to happen. >> Even to get limited functionality, we will need some self-critical help. > Okay, I'll help you. But it's like Turing test > http://www.loebner.net/Prizef/TuringArticle.html > To imitate JS capabilities, Arachne should have at least limited DOM. > Otherwise it will not be possible for JS to redirect Arachne, or to > modify some hidden (or not hidden) data in forms sent to server - if > it is server where the decision takes place about JS capabilities. > Let's implement a basic DOM; it could be as simple as... well, > I don't know English enough to be really metaphorical. Implementing a > simple DOM in Arachne is really simple. Rendering a hierarchy of standard > objects, one by one, is exactly what was first introduced in Netscape 3.0. > If you know C++ or Turbo Pascal 5.5 (or higher), or Delphi, or Java, or any > other object-oriented language, you can make Arachne capable of JS. I know ASM only. I see no difficulty in any part of this except understanding the model. (Or even a need for a model) <G> I tend to think the way the CPU thinks. ;-) <example snipped> > I subscribed myself to arachne-development a week ago. You may prefer > talking there, if I was not automatically unsubsribed for some reason ;-) The last I've Why would you be ? When one list goes down, they ALL go down. :(( I'm pleased you wish to help. I think some certain others will agree. I hope we can all find some time to collaborate in February, and I will contact you off list in the near future to see if we can come up with something that Michael might tolerate - at least in the short term. Thanks. - Clarence Verge - Back to using Arachne V1.62 ....
