Re: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread mike
On 8/11/08, tedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now, do you agree with that?! Isn't that the SAME as what you said above?! > > Now, why not read the rest of what I wrote? > > Sometimes it's hard to get an idea across because some people refuse to > read, but love to comment about the obvious. Or th

Re: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread tedd
At 12:19 PM -0700 8/11/08, mike wrote: On 8/11/08, tedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Per Jessen: I am sure you are smarter than this -- you're probably not understanding what I am saying. No, Per is correct. PHP itself cannot access anything on the client. It is a server-parsed language. T

RE: RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread tedd
At 2:07 PM -0500 8/11/08, Boyd, Todd M. wrote: I think there is a difference in definition going on here. -snip- Todd: I think you are right -- there must be some type of disconnect going on here because it's obvious that php can receive data from javascript. It's also obvious that javascr

Re: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread mike
On 8/11/08, tedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Per Jessen: > > I am sure you are smarter than this -- you're probably not understanding > what I am saying. No, Per is correct. PHP itself cannot access anything on the client. It is a server-parsed language. The client never executes PHP, period.

RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread tedd
At 8:17 PM +0200 8/11/08, Per Jessen wrote: tedd wrote: > 2) "... there is NO way for PHP to access anything on the client." <-- not true. Statement 2 _is_ 100% true. Sorry, end of discussion for my part. /Per Jessen, Zürich Per Jessen: I am sure you are smarter than this -- you're pr

RE: RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread Boyd, Todd M.
> -Original Message- > From: Per Jessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 1:17 PM > To: php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload) > > tedd wrote: > > >>Todd, I just wanted to stres

RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread Per Jessen
tedd wrote: >>Todd, I just wanted to stress that there is NO way for PHP to access >>anything on the client. The way you wrote it, you sort of implied >>that there might be other ways: >> >>"PHP by itself cannot access the local file system in a way that >>allows ..." >> >>That's all. > > The ab

RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread tedd
At 6:33 PM +0200 8/11/08, Per Jessen wrote: Boyd, Todd M. wrote: I had to use Java for the simple fact that PHP by itself cannot access the local file system in a way that allows for the partial loading of files. Given that PHP doesn't run on the client, there is no way for >> anything

RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread Per Jessen
Boyd, Todd M. wrote: >>> I had to use Java for the simple fact that PHP by itself cannot >>> access the local file system in a way that allows for the partial >>> loading of files. >> >> Given that PHP doesn't run on the client, there is no way for >> anything written in PHP to access anything on

RE: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload)

2008-08-11 Thread Boyd, Todd M.
> -Original Message- > From: Per Jessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 9:09 AM > To: php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: RE: [PHP] Re: PUT vs. POST (was: php File upload) > > Boyd, Todd M. wrote: > > > I had to use Java for the simple fact that PHP by itself