|muaddib on Dec 20, 2000 at 1:10:32 PM||Rating: 3|
|austegard on Dec 8, 2000 at 7:04:54 AM||Rating: 3|
|Neat. But why not just take the step up to PHP? Most reasonable Unix hosting plans offer either version 3 or 4 for free, and it is easier (and infinitely more powerful and expandable) than XSSI seems to be.|
|bigerv on Dec 4, 2000 at 5:31:26 AM||No Rating|
SSI is Server Side (hence it's based on the server)
(If I'm rambling its because its a Monday)
|matjday on Dec 4, 2000 at 1:20:33 AM||No Rating|
Access is great for just the situation you describe: running a small, simple site which won't get a high hit-rate. While access doesn't have the performance of SQL Server we've often found it to be the best option for small intranet applications where you don't need the power and complexity of full blown SQL Server.
|nakhtar on Dec 1, 2000 at 6:09:49 AM||No Rating|
Using Access database for the website.
Does anybody has any experience using Access database for a website. How does it perform for simple sql queries, insertions and updates.
|zpeef on Nov 30, 2000 at 12:18:31 AM||Rating: 5|
One question... does SSI work on freesites?
I saw on one page that your server had to have a *.txt file containing something for it to work...
|matjday on Nov 20, 2000 at 2:29:40 AM||No Rating|
We are using SSI to dymanically build pages at request-time.The "core page" itself is a very basic HTML page which "includes" site-wide and "section-wide" header and footer files that contain the more complicated code which applies the site look and feel.
This allows our Web editors to work with very simple pages, so they can concentrate on the content. While we are able to update the look of the whole site just by editing a few include files. We are also able to send different versions of a page to different UAs by using conditional includes to add different header and footer files to the HTML 3.2 compliant "core page".
|dzelber on Nov 19, 2000 at 6:35:16 AM||No Rating|
Could any body shade some light on this?
|pimpyt on Nov 13, 2000 at 12:38:49 AM||Rating: 4|
browser_name = navigator.appName;
if (browser_name == "Netscape")
document.write('<link REL="stylesheet" TYPE="text/css" HREF="./css/nn.css">');
if (browser_name == "Microsoft Internet Explorer")
document.write('<link REL="stylesheet" TYPE="text/css" HREF="./css/ie.css">');
else document.write('<link REL="stylesheet" TYPE="text/css" HREF="./css/nn.css">');
|beyer on Nov 12, 2000 at 5:55:36 AM||Rating: 4|
In IIS you can use, I ASP:
<% if InStr(Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_USER_AGENT"), "MSIE") > 0 then %>
<!--#include file="iebar.htm" -->
<% else %>
<!--#include file="defaultbar.htm" -->
<% end if %>
Note that IIS first load all include files an control i.e. declaration and report i.e. repeated declarations as errors, then it use the conditions to select which include will be active.
|matjday on Nov 10, 2000 at 12:53:14 AM||No Rating|
I'm assuming you read my comment and also MS's docs re SSI on IIS:
Can you outline the problem you are having (e.g. which bits of SSI work and which don't)? - someone on this site should be able to help you out.
|Friedli on Nov 9, 2000 at 11:59:04 PM||Rating: 5|
|That's what I was looking for. But, does anybody have an idea if that works on IIS4.0 as well? I couldn't make it running|
|matjday on Nov 8, 2000 at 2:22:28 AM||Rating: 4|
The writer omits to give any further reading - so here are a couple more intros to SSI:
SSI on IIS:
By default a page must be named *.asp for the server to parse it for server side code. At first glance IIS doesn't seem to support XSSI but you can do basic SSI includes etc, see e.g.:
My thought is that you might need to use server side JScript (or VBScript) to emulate this behaviour.
(MS bunnies - any input on this?)