Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Emanuele
Kay Schenk wrote: Do to recent updates to the download logic /download/other.html still exists as an entity but its basically blank since the table no longer renders. According to our Google Analytics, this page has quite a number of references, including using it as a convenient way to

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Alexandro Colorado
It would be better if you use the site to show it. That said, the reason for the table is because we werent that open to use Javascript. We would still argue that we have a noscript code. Regardless if its XML, JSON or HTML or even a bash script to autogenerate the HTML from a sqlite datasource.

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Emanuele
Alexandro Colorado wrote: It would be better if you use the site to show it. I'm showing you the code, not the result, because the result is an almost exact copy of the table you already know (provided you have javascript enabled), only in pure HTML (no javascript required). The difference is

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Marcus (OOo)
Am 07/23/2014 02:34 PM, schrieb Emanuele: Kay Schenk wrote: Do to recent updates to the download logic /download/other.html still exists as an entity but its basically blank since the table no longer renders. According to our Google Analytics, this page has quite a number of references,

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Alexandro Colorado
On 7/23/14, Emanuele emanuel...@gmail.com wrote: Alexandro Colorado wrote: It would be better if you use the site to show it. I'm showing you the code, not the result, because the result is an almost exact copy of the table you already know (provided you have javascript enabled), only in

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Kay Schenk
On 07/23/2014 12:17 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/23/2014 02:34 PM, schrieb Emanuele: Kay Schenk wrote: Do to recent updates to the download logic /download/other.html still exists as an entity but its basically blank since the table no longer renders. According to our Google

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Alexandro Colorado
On 7/23/14, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: On 7/23/14, Emanuele emanuel...@gmail.com wrote: Alexandro Colorado wrote: It would be better if you use the site to show it. I'm showing you the code, not the result, because the result is an almost exact copy of the table you already

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Marcus (OOo)
Am 07/23/2014 11:42 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado: On 7/23/14, Alexandro Coloradoj...@oooes.org wrote: On 7/23/14, Emanueleemanuel...@gmail.com wrote: Alexandro Colorado wrote: It would be better if you use the site to show it. I'm showing you the code, not the result, because the

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Marcus (OOo)
Am 07/23/2014 11:34 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On 07/23/2014 12:17 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/23/2014 02:34 PM, schrieb Emanuele: Kay Schenk wrote: Do to recent updates to the download logic /download/other.html still exists as an entity but its basically blank since the table no longer

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Andrea Pescetti
Marcus (OOo) wrote: However, I don't know why we should keep a large table with links when the whole functionality now existing in the greeen download box. If the approach by Emanuele yields (this is the impression I got from the Github code) a pure HTML output, not depending on JS, and can

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-23 Thread Marcus (OOo)
Am 07/24/2014 12:16 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Marcus (OOo) wrote: However, I don't know why we should keep a large table with links when the whole functionality now existing in the greeen download box. If the approach by Emanuele yields (this is the impression I got from the Github code) a

Re: [WWW] I think we need a redo for /download/other.html

2014-07-20 Thread Kay Schenk
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 07/20/2014 11:58 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: Do to recent updates to the download logic /download/other.html still exists as an entity but its basically blank since the table no longer renders. ah, thanks. I've