Forget about everything for now, the content of CFHTTP is saved in the CFHTTP.FileContent
variable, now in CFMX6.1, you have to say it's file.filecontent or do you mean
they are interchangable?
"The bonus is that cfhttp works much better with MX at getting things..."
MX? 6.0 or 6.1? I'm already using MX (6.0). ???
As I mentioned the key problem for the CFHTTP for CFMX 6.0 on Windows (seem to be confirmed by quite a few)
is in using https protocol.
What's going on? man.
>We're upgrading right now, and my CFHTTP calls worked after I rewrote them
>slightly.
>
>Basically, for some reason I had this:
>
><CFHTTP WHATEVER...>
>processing logic including outputting the #file.filecontent#
></CFHTTP>
>
>The obvious problem is where the end cfhttp call is. Doing this solved any
>problems:
>
><CFHTTP WHATEVER...> </CFHTTP>
>processing logic including outputting the #file.filecontent#
>
>
>The bonus is that cfhttp works much better with MX at getting things like
>linked files in the html head area like stylesheets and .js files.
>
>-Kevin
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Chunshen (Don) Li" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 10:46 AM
>Subject: Risk of Upgrading to CF6.1 from 6.0
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have not had a good experience of upgrading from CF5.x to CF6.0 at the
>request/urge of two MM R&D staff (actually via HOF) back about six months
>ago. My platform is Windows XP. The key reason for me to consider the move
>is the current version's "bug, not?" in CFHTTP tag's https call. The tag is
>robustness and reliability is critical to some applications that I'm
>seriously considering.
>>
>> What's your thought on this? Thanks.
>>
>> Don Li
>>
>>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
