On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:36:54 +1300, you wrote: >On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 21:36, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: >> > Save as webpage complete, >> >> Nope, the page is already saved by some previous action, and it was the >> result of some form data so can't be reloaded/resaved. Also, I am not >> really interested in doing things the way mozilla happens to like them. > >Mozilla is extremely fussy about how it does things. It sticks to >standards etc like glue. > >> Remember: things have to work with any browser :) And I don't see why >> I shouldn't save web pages with wget or konqueror's file->save; mozilla >> being too dumb to do anything with it otherwise isn't a good enough >> reason. (And there were 2 separate issues: can't display ./file.php > >Why should a .php file be rendered as an html file? >A php file might have html in it but is *not* html. Just because >Konqueror does something dodgey that makes things easier under certain >circumstances doesn't make it right. ><flamebait>Ye gods Volker, you're making the same arguments as M$. ></flamebait> > >:-) > >> and can't load ./style.css when displaying ./file.html - neither make >> me more keen on mozilla). > >Have you looked at the paths etc to the css inside the html file? (or >the php file or whatever) > >> >> Perhaps it's fixed now, but my 1.2.1 is less than a year old. > >Have you actually established that there is something to fix?
Couldn't agree more! In this context, php is a server side language, and you're looking at it directly with a client browser. For example, how on earth would you expect the client to handle database access to a (now remote and inaccessible ) database?? The php _generates_ the html that your browser sees. To do this, it needs to have the support of a php enabled html server. Why not build yourself a local apache server with php support, and use that to serve the php towards Mozilla, and then see whether it works. You'll find details at http://httpd.apache.org/, and http://www.php.net/downloads.php hth, steve
