On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 09:18 -0400, Bill Erickson wrote: > JFYI, when all is said and done, it may be best to replace native Java > print dialog with a series of custom settings the user simply enters > directly into the browser print configuration interface. Before we do > that, though, I'd like to settle on which exact settings we need to support > (which we have to do, regardless, for settings persistence). IOW, if we > have to manage scaling externally (i.e. in the browser), there is an > argument for managing all of the settings directly within the browser.
Ok, I haven't looked into the new web client yet so I'm probably about to say something really dumb. But I have looked at and use web stuff in general and a thought occurred while reading this thread. I'm seeing one of three things: 1. The web client isn't going to be as clean when printing patron tickets. Currently it can silently print. No pure HTML 5 solution can do that for reasons that should be fairly obvious: webpages can invoke the browser's print dialog via javascript but may not adjust settings or actually click the OK button. I'm guessing this is why the interest in Java? 2. Java either CAN or CAN'T do the deed, either one of which is BAD. If it can't then the same problem exists. And if it can it really must be reported as a security bug and thus will soon be fixed... hopefully before every dodgy scammer on the Internet finds the exploit. 3. There is an exception somewhere in the security model for locally installed apps I haven't found yet? I know HTML5ish apps on some devices have hacks to allow javascript to access pretty much the entire platform API but widely deployed browsers don't support that sort of thing, at least there isn't anything in any of my copy of _Javascript: The Definitive Guide_. Or are print jobs going to get originated by Cups on the server end? But that wouldn't scale at all. Stackoverflow mentions that for Firefox you can manually set a config value that makes all printing silent but that would be generally horrible for so many reasons. See a plugin for Chrome, a way to get ActiveX to do it for IE.... nothing web based though that isn't a brutal hack.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
