Well, it can work as I've done it in a production application. It's a pain in the ass but once the strategy is in place it works fine. The idea is to include a form in each NS Layer and when one of these form is submited, reconstruct a form by collecting all values of the forms in the layers (or not) and submit this one, by writing it in an hidden layer.
It wasn't fun, but it worked. Regarding the question of dropping NS4, on Mac OS X, NS4 running in classic, is still faster than Mozilla/NS6, so it's probably still attractive, at least for that reason. Benoit On Monday, April 8, 2002, at 06:50 AM, Mark Proctor wrote: > Have you tried using forms across layers in NS4 - it doesn't work - > which makes it impossible to build web applications using layers and > NS4. Also CSS stuff doesn't work with nested layers in NS4. For me both > are pretty essential - and I want to utilise them to the max. > > I can see the need to support NS4, but I don't think it should be > allowed to hold back the development of future DynAPI. Which means > either a layered API is developed that, provides support in some areas > for NS4, without holding back other areas - or a collaboritve fork is > created one with support one with out. Where the NS4 one follows the > main tree as closely as possible and backports all NS4 compatible > features. > > Regards > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Michael > Pemberton > Sent: 08 April 2002 12:56 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Dynapi-Dev] Isn't it about time we drop NS4? > > > As someone who has only recently made the move from NS4 to Mozilla, I am > missing some of the ease of use that NS4 provided. > > Having spent a fair bit of my time forcing IE / Mozilla to behave in the > same logical fashion as NS4, I am also reluctant to drop NS4 support all > together. > > I am still to see any major reason for dropping NS4 support. Most of > the time it is someone wanting a particular "trick" that is only > available in the most recent of browsers. > > I see very little problem with adding an *extension* that is only > available in recent browsers. So long as they remain just that, > extensions. > > To continue down this path would be not unlike Mozilla dropping BeOS > support because they can't use a M$ related feature. > > If you wish to customise your own copy of the DynAPI, > then feel free to. If you see a feature that you believe should be > added, do so. But to force the rest of the DynAPI users to drop NS4 > support is too large a step to take without actually outlining the > reasons for doing so. > > I will now put on my fireproof helmet and await the oncoming fire front > : ) > ---- > Michael Pemberton > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ICQ: 12107010 > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > _______________________________________________ Dynapi-Dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
