On 27 Okt, 18:26, Aaron Watters <aaron.watt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Alex sent me the traceback (thanks!) and after consulting > the logs and the pages I figured out that the version of > Firefox in question was not ignoring my javascript links like > it should. Instead FF was interpreting them as HTTP links to > pages that didn't exist -- which is perfectly idiotic -- so > WHIFF was complaining that it couldn't find the page (which > is correct).
Were you using "javascript:" URLs in the links before? Maybe using the onclick attribute is more appropriate for JavaScript-specific actions: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/interact/scripts.html#adef-onclick > Anyway, you shouldn't see this buglet any more -- if you > don't have javascript you will get a nice polite message > saying that the page doesn't work unless javascript is > enabled. > > http://aaron.oirt.rutgers.edu/myapp/GenBankTree/index I still don't see why you couldn't have a non-JavaScript version. Think of all the people wanting to use Python to screen-scrape the content! ;-) Paul P.S. Although people not running JavaScript on every page by default are often criticised as being modern-day Luddites, and I too used to have JavaScript running for everything, a few annoying experiences led me to installing NoScript just to stop stupid CPU-wasting advertisements. Useful sites employing JavaScript probably suffer from the effects of such antics, unfortunately, which is one reason I advocate supporting non-JavaScript browsers. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
