Category: Just Shelley

It isn’t Fall without trees changing color, birds flying south for the Winter, and being in New York to speak at the Internet World conference — this time as part of the Webmaster Forum.

However, this time, I stayed in New York for a few days. What an adventure.

New York Cabbies

The cab that took me from Penn Station to my hotel was driven by a gentleman from Haiti who happened to have strong religious beliefs. I know he was religious because he kept playing religious tapes, and would slam on the brakes occasionally in order to jot something down in a notebook he kept by his seat. I knew he was Haitian as he would alternate this behavior with Haitian utterances under his breath as he literally tore through that town, determined to get me to my hotel at all due speed.

I didn’t know one could drive between cars in car lanes in New York. I also didn’t know that one could drive 60MPH down Park Avenue in the middle of the day. I do now. I also received a lesson in the finer points of car horn blasting in New York.

There’s the light tatoo on the horn that says “Yo!”. There’s the more emphatic tatooing that seems to say “Yo! Stupid!”.

There’s the single tap that just lets folks know you’re in the vicinity and to watch out. Compare this with the heavy hand on the horn that will get even the most diehard New Yorker’s attention. If the horn blower is a cab driver, people seem to understand that the cabby is just letting someone know that they are invading the driver’s personal territory, whatever that may be.

I also know that pedestrians in New York don’t walk in front of the cabs without looking at the driver’s face, first. How does this driver define territory…

Cab rides are a way to experience New York, but I can’t experience a new town or city from a car — I just don’t like cars. So, I decided to walk to Central Park. On foot. No cabs.

Walking to Central Park

I started my walk on Madison Avenue — established home of advertising agencies everywhere.

Madison Avenue doesn’t have the crowds other streets do in New York, thought there are a large number of gray and black suited people, all with cellphones glued to their ears (call them New York earrings).

The buildings along the way reminded me of some of the canyons I used to explore in Arizona, except those canyons were created by water flows over a millenium of time. New York canyons are built on man’s desire to one up nature. I did notice, though, when I crossed over to Fifth Avenue that the human tide is remarkably similar to a moving river. Woe to you going against that tide of affluent and determined shoppers.

(I particularly treasure a moment when two older, well dressed women walking behind me suddenly stopped in the middle of the sidewalk and murmured “Armani” in one breath. I consider this to be a quintessential New York moment.)

The Park

Central Park is a surpise after all the opulence of the surrounding stores and the shadows cast by the towering buildings elsewhere in downtown New York.

Part of the Park was closed off for renovation, but I walked every last bit of those sections that were open. And it was a long walk.

First, let me state categorically that I cannot BELIEVE that anyone would jog in the Park after dark. The place is full of nooks and crannies, dark corners, and bushes. Charming by day, sinister by night. A horse carriage ride, yes — but not a lonely stroll through the footpaths. I’d rather play tag with a grizzley. It would be safer.

Central Park is pretty, but the trees look a little tired, and more than a bit dusty. However, the bushes and lawns are very pretty, as are the little specialized areas such as the Dairy farm.

I found an old fashioned carousel and thought about taking a ride, but dignity intruded — dammit.

My favorite sections of the Park were rocky outcroppings with bits of mica scattered about, sparkling in the noon day sun. Something like the windows at Tiffany’s and Cartier’s I passed on the way, only I could touch the rocks at Central Park and not get arrested.

I actually saw a black squirrel; I’ve not seen one of that coloration before. I don’t have my books to check to see if this is a natural variation, or a protective adaption based on New York city smog. (I know, meow, meow — but Boston is a whole lot greener.)

I walked through some bushes at one point and found a group of people silently standing around a mosaic embedded in the cement. All the mosaic had on it was the single word “imagine” — I was in Strawberry Fields, the John Lennon memorial.

One word, and I stopped dead in my tracks. One moment, with a lifetime of memories, flooding in, all because of that one word.

Back from the Park

I was getting tired at this point, so back to the hotel.

Towards the end of my walk, I stood out in front of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, an incredible edifice of which New Yorkers take considerable pride. If you’ve been to New York, you know what it’s like to come upon the Cathedral after blocks and blocks of modern glass and steel.

I have to admit that when I first looked at St. Patrick’s, I thought of how much further we would be as a people if only we expended as much energy and resources on education as we did and still do on religion.

We could have cured cancer by now, eliminated all smog and pollution, perhaps be walking on some distant planet around some distant sun.

Then I walked into St. Patrick’s. I literally stopped in the middle of the Vestibule, overwhelmed by the absolute rightness of the interior of the church. The vaulted ceilings, the stained glass windows, the slight smoky air from thousands of votive candles lit by the faithful.

It then came to me that without faith — or perhaps human spirit — we wouldn’t even try to cure cancer, or walk on the moon, much less planets surrounding distant stars. And we wouldn’t have beauty such as that.

Maybe we didn’t do so bad with our time and our resources in the past, after all.

New York, New York

My last stop on my walk was Rockerfeller Center, located a couple of blocks from the hotel. As I approached the Center, I could hear the strains of the Sinatra song, “New York, New York” filling the air. I kid you not — there had just been an ice show at the center, which finished by playing New York’s anthem song.

I couldn’t end my walking tour of New York on a better note than that.

Imagine this scenario: You get up in the morning, grab a cup of coffee, and wander out to the Living Room. You stand and gaze out the window for a few minutes taking advantage of that great mountain view. Then you casually go into your home office and start looking through your email. After you handle your email you take a shower and get dressed, sweats or jeans or shorts maybe, and you go back to your office and get down to some serious work. You break when you are tired and you eat when you are hungry. When the kids come home from school you chat with them about the day and maybe you even go for a walk with them. Later you get back on the computer for another few hours and quit for the night, satisfied with your day’s work.

Okay, everyone, you can stop crying now. And you can stop shaking your head,  saying this is impossible. With today’s technology, this is not only possible it is becoming cost effective and practical.

Today many of us have access to computers in our homes that enable us to do anything from creating a report, researching a product, to writing complex computer software. With the increased proliferation of ISDN lines and alternative connectivities being explored, we can connect with our jobs and have virtually the same access as we would sitting at a desk on site. And that office does not have to be in the same town.

Security? This does not have to be a limitation. We are learning more about computer security than ever and we are finding more ways to increase the safety of our systems.

Cost? How much does it cost you to maintain a workable environment for each of your people? If you are maintaining a site for a software developer you are maintaining software, a machine, a phone line, restrooms, an ergonomically designed workstation, and you are maintaining a location. That last one is a real key. Companies are growing and are finding that they may actually be running out of room to house their people, so they double up and cram people in and they lose productivity and they may actually lose people.

Teamwork? Have you had a chance to try out Netscape’s new version 3.0 beta software with LiveChat. I went out and talked and shared a virtual whiteboard with some person in Utah, and someone else in Texas. And this is a freebie add-on to an internet tool. You have the technology now to have cameras mounted on PCs and have people share virtual working spaces and work cooperatively online. The only thing you don’t share is bad breath.

Benefits? I bet if you promised this capability to people on only a partial week basis you will have increased worker satisfaction and a whole lot more people wanting to work for you. How about having to maintain less desk space if you have workers desk share? How about having fewer cars in your parking lot, which is probably overcrowded as it is. How about giving back to the community by fewer cars being on the road?

Sick Time? If you have an employee with a broken leg they can work at home. If they have a bad cold? The employee probably would come into work, be pretty uncomfortable and manage to pass their germs to half a dozen other people. Wouldn’t you rather they stay home? How about maternity or paternity leave? Nice option for those folks who would like to be available to their kids and still have a career. What a concept!

So, why is this not happening more? Some types of work just won’t make the transition to at home work such as factory and manufacturing processes and many services and other professions. If you have a home cleaning service, this usually means the customer’s home. And some companies are not set up yet, and may not be able to afford the type of setup that would enable their employees to work from home. Other companies may work on super secret stuff that has to be worked on behind armed guards and locked doors.

Now let’s look at the ‘bad’ reasons for not allowing people to work at home.

You don’t trust your employees and you have to have your eye on them at all times. Go Away. You have hired professionals and adults, consider treating them as such and you probably will not have the turnover you now have.

The work you do needs a centralized database. With the increased ISDN line connectivity, you can connect to your database efficiently from home. How about taking snapshots of the database to work on from your home PC? Concerned about someone accessing company secrets from this? Ask yourself this: Do you think that your secret is important enough that a person will break into your employee’s home to access their PC? Do you have armed guards at your front doors to keep people from walking in? Do you have absolutely no connection between your internal computer system and an outside connection? If you answered No to any of these, try a different mindset.

A legitimate concern is the availability of people for mentoring, or for brainstorming, or for any other cooperative task. You might want to consider how much of this really does occur and you then might want to consider a partial solution such as desk sharing: two people share a desk and a PC and work at home part of the week and at work part of the week.

Communication? Last I heard, homes had phones too, and email and internet connectivity…

Concerned about that security issue? Check with consultants in your area and find out the security risks. Don’t just assume that this type of connectivity will take your important systems down, find out the facts.

How about liability? Concerned that your employee may get hurt at home and sue you? Check with your lawyer and also your insurance companies about steps you and your employee can take. And lawyers and insurance companies, start understanding this type of business…it will only increase in the future.

Costs? You bet there will be costs to enabling off-site employees if they need computer access. But consider what you can get back: The main factor that raises envy in me and my professional peers is when one of us can work at home. It even beats out salary as the number one reason to take one job over another. And for most companies, the number one cost is their employees. Want to attract and keep the best?

There are a lot of issues to working at home. I would like to hear from companies that have made this transition successfully and would like to publish your success stories in the month’s to come. And I would also like to hear from those companies who have made a choice not to allow off-site employees and their reasons. Let’s start exploring this issue and see “Why we CAN work at home”.

That’s it, folks.

Originally published in Netscape World, archived at the Wayback Machine

Prior to Netscape implementing JavaScript in Netscape Navigator, web developers had few tools to create interactive content for their web pages. Now this scripting language gives developers the ability to do things such as check form contents, communicate with the user based on their actions, and modify the web page dynamically without the web page being re-loaded and without the use of Java, plug-ins or ActiveX controls.

Unfortunately, JavaScript was not usable by any other browser until Microsoft released Internet Explorer (IE) 3.0. With this release web developers could deliver interactive content that would at least work with the two most widely used browsers. Or could they?

On the surface, the JavaScript supported by both companies is identical. They both provide the same conditional control statements, have defined objects such as window or document,and can be used directly in HTML documents. They both support events based on user actions and support functions in a similar manner. However, this article will demonstrate that though the languages may look the same on the surface, there are differences that can trip the unwary developer.

JavaScript Objects

To understand the differences between the two implementations of JavaScript you must examine the objects both support. As an example, with Navigator 3.0 Netscape provides a new object image which is an array (defined as images that contains the images in the document currently loaded. This object allows the developer to change the images of a document without re-loading the document or using Java or other technique. With this capability the developer can write the following JavaScript code section without error:

sSelected = "http://www.some.com/some.gif"
document.images[iIndex].src = sSelected

This code will change the src property of the image that is contained in the array at the index given in the variable iIndex. If this variable contained the value 2, the 3^rd image as loaded in the document (the array indices begin at 0) would be changed to the image located in the given URL. An example using images can be found here.

Running the same example with Internet Explorer will result in a alert message that states that “‘images’ is not an object”.

Other examples of objects that are defined for Netscape Navigator but not for Microsoft Internet Explorer are:

• The Area object, which is an array of links for an image map that allows the developer to capture certain events for the image map that can be used to provide additional information to the user. With this, the developer can capture a mouseOver event to write out information about the link in the status bar.
• The FileUpload object which provides a text like control and a button marked with “Browse” that will allow a reader to enter a file name. The JavaScript can then access the name of the file.
• The Function object which allows the developer to define and assign a function to a variable which can then be assigned to an event.
• The mimeTypes Array of supported MIME types.
• The option object which is an array of the options implemented for SELECT and which allows the developer to change the text of the option at runtime
• The applet object, which is an array of Applets in the document (read-only)
• The plugin object, which is an array called embeds that contains the plug-ins contained in the document (read-only)
• The plugins array, which is an array of plug-ins currently installed in the client browser

At this time there are no JavaScript or JScript objects defined for Internet Explorer that are also not defined for Netscape. However, as JScript is an implementation script for IE and Microsoft has defined their own IE scripting model, this could change in the future.

JavaScript Object Behavior and Ownership

Internet Explorer may not have additional objects but it has defined a different hierarchy and ownership for some of the objects that are used by both it and Navigator. All objects are contained within the window object in the IE scripting model, which can be viewed here, but not all objects are owned by window with the Navigator model, which can be viewed with the JavaScript Authoring Guide. The object Navigator, which is the object that stores information about the browser currently being used, is an example of an owned object by window in IE but not in Navigator.

This will not present an incompatibility problem between the two browsers as the developer will usually not preface the object with the term “window” as the following code demonstrates:

<FORM NAME="form1">
<input type=button value='press' onClick="alert(navigator.appName)">
</FORM>

The above code will work with both browsers.

The differences between the ownership can become a problem when an object is owned by different levels of objects. An example is the history object, which is owned by the windowobject in IE, but by the document object in Navigator. When used in the current window and document, the object will work the same as the following code will demonstrate:

<FORM NAME="form1">
<input type=button value='press' onClick="history.back()">
</FORM>

The reason the same code can work for both is that window is assumed for both IE and Netscape and document is assumed for Navigator, at least in this instance because history is also an object in its own right. In the case of a document being opened as part of a frame, the differences then become noticeable. The following code will work when the document is opened as a frame in IE, but will not work in Navigator:

<body>
<script>
function clicked() {
history.back()
}
</script>
<FORM NAME="form1">
<input type=button value='press' onClick="clicked()">
</FORM>
</body>

Clicking on the button from the code above will work for IE. The previous document in the History list will be opened, but the same code will not work for Navigator. Clicking on the button will result in neither a change of document nor an error. Prefacing the history object with parent will enable this code to work with both browsers.

JavaScript Properties

Even when IE and Navigator share a common object and a common object ownership, they can differ on the properties for an object. An example is the document object. The properties for both implementations are the same except for an URL property for the Navigator implementation and a location property for the IE implementation. However, if you examine both properties, they are identical! Both contain the URL of the document. Both are read-only. The following code will work with Navigator, but results in an empty Alert message box for IE:

<FORM NAME="form1">
<input type=button value='press' onClick="alert(document.URL)">
</FORM>

According to Microsoft documentation, the equivalent for IE would be to use document.location.href. However, though this does not result in an error, it also results in an empty alert box. The following code achieves the desired results and, happily, works in both browsers:

<FORM NAME="form1">
<input type=button value='press' onClick="alert(location.href)">
</FORM>

The above example does demonstrate another area of caution when using the JavaScript language: this language is unstable in both environments and is changing continuously. Don’t assume something will work because the documentation states it will, and don’t assume it will work the same on all operating systems. Both browsers can have different behaviors across different operating systems, sometimes because of operating system differences and sometimes because of bugs that were missed during testing on that specific OS.

JavaScript Methods and Events

A web developer can find ways of working around differences in objects and properties, but working around differences in methods may not be so easy. When we develop we expect a certain behavior to result when we call a specific function and pass to it certain parameters. With Microsoft Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator, the best case scenario is that we can use a pre-defined object method with both browsers and have the same result. The worst case scenario is that the method works with both browsers, but the result is different.

An example of the best case scenario is to use JavaScript to validate form field contents which have changed or to use these contents to calculate a value used elsewhere. Calling a JavaScript function from the onChange event to process the changed contents as demonstrated below will work with both browsers:

<!--- Form fields
<p>Item Quantity: <INPUT TYPE="text" Name="qty">
Item Cost: <INPUT TYPE="text" Name="cost"
                onChange="NewCost()">
Total Cost: <INPUT TYPE="text" Name="total" Value=0>
…
<!--- Function
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="javascript">
<!--- hide script from old browsers

// NewCost will
// calculate cost of qty and item
function NewCost() {
        var iCost = parseFloat(document.Item.cost.value)
        var iQty = parseInt(document.Item.qty.value)

        var iTotal = iCost * iQty
        document.Item.total.value = iTotal
        }

The above will work as expected with both IE and Navigator. When the user enters a quantity and a cost, the onChange event will fire for the cost field and a JavaScript function called NewCost() will be called. This function will call two built-in JavaScript functions, parseFloat() and parseInt(), to access and convert the form field values. These will then be used to compute a total which is placed in the total field.

So far so good. Another JavaScript function in the web page will be processed when the user presses the submit button. This pre-defined button style will normally submit the form. The developer can capture the submission and perform validation on the fields. Coding this for Navigator would look like the following:

<FORM NAME="Item"
        ACTION="some.cgi" onSubmit="return SendOrder()">
…
<!--- Function
// submit order
function SendOrder() {

        // validate data
        if (document.Item.Name.value == "") {
                alert("You must enter your name")
                return false
                }
        return true
        }

Capturing the onSubmit event will allow the developer to call a function to process the form fields. If they choose, they can perform validation in this function. If the validation fails, say the user did not provide a name, the function notifies the reader and returns false, preventing the form from being submitted. If the user did provide a name, the function would return true, and the form would be submitted.

Following the documentation that can be found at the Microsoft site, the developer would expect something like this to work for IE as well as Navigator. It does, to a point.

With IE the onSubmit event is captured and the SendOrder() function is called. If the user did not enter a name value, an alert would occur. The behavior is the same for both browsers at this point. However, if the user does provide a value, Navigator would then submit the form and a follow-up form would be displayed. This does NOT occur with IE IF you are testing the page locally, probably due to a bug missed during the testing. It does work if you run the web page documents through a web server.

However, without knowing that the difference between the two results was a matter of document location rather than document coding the web page developer could have spent considerable time trying to get the same behavior for both browsers.

Aside from the differences already noted, the browsers may process code in a funtionally identical manner and yet perform quite differently. This can be demonstrated with another popular use of JavaScript which is to open a secondary window for some purpose and to maintain communication between the two windows. This is widely used by Netscape for their tutorials.

Both browsers support a property for the window object called opener. This property can be used to contain a reference to the window that opened the secondary window.

The following code demonstrates using JavaScript to open a secondary window and to set the opener property to the original window:

<HTML>
<HEAD><TITLE> Original Window </TITLE>
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
<!--- hide script from old browsers
// OpenSecondary will open a second window
//
function OpenSecond(iType, sMessage) {
        // open window
        newWindow=window.open("second.htm","",
                "toolbar=no,directories=no,width=500,height=300")
        // modify the new windows opener value to
        // point to this window
        if (newWindow != null && newWindow.opener == null)
                newWindow.opener=window

        }
// end hiding from old browsers -->
</SCRIPT>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<H1> Open a new Window and get information</H1>

<FORM NAME="CallWindow">
<p>Click to open Window:
<p>
<INPUT TYPE="button" NAME="OpenWin" VALUE="Click Here"
        onClick="OpenSecond()">
<p>
</FORM>
</BODY>
</HTML>

The above HTML and JavaScript creates a simple document with one button. Pressing the button opens a new window (creates a new instance of the browser) that does not have a toolbar or directories and is set to a certain width and height. The HTML source document that is opened into this new window is “second.htm”.

The HTML and JavaScript in the secondary window is shown below:

<HTML>
<HEAD><TITLE> Information</TITLE>

<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
<!--- hide script from old browsers
// SetInformation
// function will get input values
// and set to calling window
function SetInformation() {
        opener.document.open()
        opener.document.write("<BODY>")
        opener.document.write("<H1> Return from Secondary</h1>")
        opener.document.write("</BODY>")
        opener.document.close()
        opener.document.bgColor="#ff0000"
        window.close()
        }
// end hiding from old browsers -->
</SCRIPT>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<p><form>
Click on the button:<p>
<INPUT type="button" Value="Click on Me"
     onClick="SetInformation()">
</CENTER>
</FORM>
</BODY>
</HTML>

This code will display a button labeled “Click on Me”. Pressing this button will result in the document page for the original window being modified to display the words “Return from Secondary”. The JavaScript will also change the background color of the original document and then will close the secondary window. When run in Navigator, the sample behaves as expected. Not so, however, with IE.

First, when you open the secondary window in IE you will notice that the document in the original window seems to blank out for a moment. In addition, the secondary window opens at the top left hand side of the desktop with IE but opens directly over the original window with Navigator, no matter where that original window is.

When you press the button that modifies the original document, IE does modify the document with the new header, as Navigator does, and the background on the original document will change briefly. However, when the secondary window is closed the background color of the original document returns to the original color!

What is worse is that running this sample for a few times with IE will cause the browser to crash! How soon it will crash seems to suggest that resources are not being freed, or are being freed incorrectly. Whatever the cause, this behavior should make a developer feel cautious about opening up a secondary window within IE.

Solutions to working with both Internet Explorer and Navigator

JavaScript is a useful tool for creating interactive content without using Java or some other technique. As we have seen, problems arise out of the incompatibility between Navigator and IE. What are ways to avoid these problems?

• Code for one browser only. This is not really a viable solution. While Netscape Navigator is the most popular browser in use today, Microsoft Internet Explorer is gaining quite a following. Using Navigator-only JavaScript that will limit your web page’s audience.
• Code only to the least common denominator. By limiting the JavaScript to that which works for both Navigator and IE, developers will have access to most of the functionality they need. However, with this approach developers will need to be aware of the gotchas that have been discussed in this article. In other words, the developer has to test with both browsers; the tests will have to occur via the web server as well as run locally; the tests should be repeated several times to ensure that no adverse effects show up over time; the code should be tested with all possible environments.
• Code for each browser within the same page. This is actually my favorite approach though it will require more effort by the developer. Both browsers will process JavaScript labeled as <SCRIPT LANGUAGE=”javascript”>, however only Navigator will process script labeled as <SCRIPT LANGUAGE=”javascript1.1″>. With this approach, the developer can place JavaScript common to both browsers in a SCRIPT tag labeled with “javascript” and Navigator specific code in a SCRIPT tag labeled with “javascript1.1”. To add in IE specific code, the developer would probably want to use VBScript code or use the tag JScript whenever applicable. At this time, JScript is implemented for scripting with events only, not as a language specification for the SCRIPT tag.

Summary

JavaScript is a very effective tool, and a relatively simple method for adding interactive content to a web page. With version 3.0 of Internet Explorer, using JavaScript is viable for both of the most popular browsers in use. However, developersneeds to be aware of the differences between Netscape Navigator and Microsoft Internet Explorer and should test thoroughly with both before posting the page to their site.