World: r3wp

I can paint on an image that is stored in the Cheyenne webapp

How do you define webapp?

That's the term Cheyenne uses for a password protected area of the 
webspace

ahh..

did you need a password to draw on it?

let me do a quick video

http://screencast.com/t/ICQzmG4FP5

ok

the paint is a bit sluggish :(

Why faxes? Do they not have internet in NZ?

It's for the USA.  Not for me

Oh, and Canada

Still

Most docs in the USA and Canada get prescription requests by fax 
from the pharmacy

That industry is as bad as government when it comes to IT

I don't recall the plugin being this sluggish

Chrome?

IE

Anyone using IE can tell me why the paint is so very slow? http://www.compkarori.com/faxes/paint.html

Or, any View experts here .... Anton??

the plugin doesn't seem to show up in task manager.

I had always imagined that the view.dll ran just like View in terms 
of speed.

I looks like events are flowing too much. I guess events have to 
"traverse" the browser and then go to view.dll.

Maybe you should try an event filtering like romano/gabriele's one. 
eat.r is in rebol.org, but is old. I think there was an earlier version 
somewhere (Romano's web site : url ?)

I looks = It looks

Hmm.

I guess I could bring up the paint in it's own window so that it 
is outside the browser

I'lll give that a go.

the browser makes a nice container though allowing me to scroll the 
paint applet

I thought about enclosing the image inside <canvas> tags .. but doesn't 
work.

Yes, that works better, taking the paint surface out of the browser 
into it's own window.

graham, i think i remember the pluging getting a lot of mouse events 
(more than the standalone view). i think this was a IE thing.

you could solve using something like event compression etc.

Oh well, using it's own window also works :)

Anyone got the plugin to work with FF3 ?

http://code.google.com/p/nativeclient/

so you have rebol running ??

Nice - so web guys are cheating on us, RIA followers, right? First 
they claim web is the mantra. Then they create new browser to even 
more split browser/standards penetration, then they allow native 
code to be hooked. Surely, to make some difference, this one will 
not be compatible with NS type plugins, to make it even more difficult 
for devs ...

Would this "Native CLient"  run on any hardware that is not  x86?

iirc they are using some x86 specific features to enforce security, 
so my guess is no.

Is there any point in the REBOl.org Script Library supporting the 
plugin any more?


There are 15 scripts that are tagged as runable in the plugin. But 
none of them do in recent browers.
    http://www.rebol.org/st-topic-details.r?tag=platform//plugin

for historical purposes?

Is there a reason to remove them? Adding a note about compatibility 
would be good, but removing them means losing a bit of reference 
material. I don't know the last version of IE it works under, but 
I actually have some old things that use it. I still have IE6 here 
for running those. :-\

How ironic. REBOL keeping IE6 alive

The REBOL Plugin is less safe to run than IE6, so maybe not.

Well, it's keeping IE6 alive at least at Gregg's

To answer Sunanda's question: I would concur that there is no point 
in supporting the plug-in any more. It would be wise to archive the 
run-plugin scripts somewhere but I don't feel they need to be maintained.


I assume that you didn't intend to remove the [plugin] scripts from 
the Library.

That's probably as clear as mud. By "run-plugin" scripts I mean the 
ones on Rebol.org that allow users to run [plugin] scripts directly 
in their browser from the Library.

Thanks for the comments.

Even Microsoft is eagerly promoting the retirement of IE6:
   http://ie6countdown.com/

I think we can help that by disabling the plugin feature at REBOL.org 
:)


Peter -- that would not mean deleting the scripts -- they work fine 
if downloaded, just like other scripts. It would mean, in part, disabling 
the special "run in plugin" link that appears when you view them

That's what I thought. I would disble the 'run in plugin' link if 
I were you.

Thanks.


I've tweaked the code so the plugin links are only visible to logged-in 
members; similarly the plugin will only attempt to run if you are 
logged-in. So casual visitors will not see it.


If there is ever a viable plugin for modern browsers, I'd be happy 
to reenable the public links.