Jarno Järvenpää wrote:
>
> Phil Davis wrote:
>
> >Here's a long version of what Andu said:
> >
> >If you access a stack that resides on another computer, (1) you can only
> >do it via http, and (2) unless your computer can view the other
> >computer's HD as its own peripheral device, the stack loses its
> >association with the source stack on the disk of the other computer. In
> >other words, once you retrieve a stack, it exists only in your
> >computer's memory - it has the same status that a new stack has before
> >you save it.
>
> This doesn't mean that I could not access files in other computers
> normally in LAN (i.e. using filepaths like \\computerX\dirX\filex.xxx),
> right?
>
Right. Your computer would view the LAN server as its own peripheral
device, so the stack would still have a filename and could be saved
without giving it a new name, etc.
> >If your server is a Unix box, you can write CGI scripts in MetaTalk (as
> >text files rather than as stacks). The scripts can respond to your data
> >without becoming part of your local session. And they can access stacks
> >on the computer where they reside, and act as your agent there.
>
> Has anyone used MetaCard to do "web shops" or such? Are there
> any commong problems? I am looking for a new ISP, and wonder
> how handy it would be to get an ISP which agreeds to install MetaCard
> on their servers.
>
> -Jarno Järvenpää
--
Phil Davis
------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
