Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Frames

Expand Messages
  • bensbach
    Some days ago I did a little re-vamping and put some additional documents on my website, on a server in the UK. The changes cannot be seen here in Thailand.
    Message 1 of 20 , Jan 18, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Some days ago I did a little re-vamping and put some
      additional documents on my website, on a server in the
      UK. The changes cannot be seen here in Thailand. Going
      on past experience it will take about a week for the
      changes to become visible. Have been told that websites
      are cached on servers around the world and these are only
      "refreshed" every so often. (?) Anyway, I cannot yet see
      what bugs the site may have, or even if it is there at
      all.
      Frustrating !

      The site, www.rainbow ends.org uses two vertical frames:
      a narrow left-hand one to list content and to the right
      of that the document being viewed.

      I gather that frames are rather disparaged these days,
      but the alternative until something better is widely
      adopted would seem to be tables.

      The problem with tables is:

      1) I do not have time to go manually updating large
      numbers of files every time the Contents changes
      (optimistically, I hope to do this more often in future,
      the site having been almost unchanged in seven years)

      2) I do not have any programming skills to automate the
      task.

      3) The content of a table is fixed, while the content of
      a frame can be changed with a mouse click

      At the foot of each document there is a link which now
      goes to a Categories Page which links to several Contents
      Pages. Each of the latter lists files that can be clicked
      on and brought up in the Main Frame.

      Previously there was just a single Contents Page, listing
      all documents (i.e. no Categories). But this made for a
      long and rather indigestible list of documents, which
      would have become longer still with additions.

      In the good old days, a person clicking on "Contents" at
      the bottom of a page would see all the documents
      available. If they came through the Front Page of the
      site, they would see this in the Main Frame, and if they
      came though a search-engine they would see it without any
      frames. Doubtless there was a better way of doing this,
      but at least there were no frames-within-frames.

      Now however, using modern browsers -- IE7 and Opera (not
      having tried with the others) -- this no longer works
      properly if one is not viewing the files from within
      frames. Maybe TARGET="xxx" confuses the browser when
      there is no TARGET="xxx".

      What happens is that the linked file is opened, but the
      focus remains on the existing file.

      With Opera, a new tab appears, but most people would not
      realise this and so would not click on it.

      With IE7, a new window opens, but this is often hidden
      behind the existing window.

      One answer might be to take people to the Frameset page.
      But is there is some way of preventing those already
      viewing within frames from picking up another set of
      frames ?

      Would this make the site less accessible to the search-
      engines ?

      Despite the frames, which it has always had, five years
      ago 65% of hits were via the search-engines -- although
      it had never been promoted to them.

      Now however, perhaps as result of the site's content
      remaining unchanged for so long, not only has the number
      of visitors fallen off considerably, but the proportion
      coming through the search engines has fallen to 35% of
      the total.

      Your advice and comments would be much appreciated.

      Eric Johnston

      p.s. Of the search criteria, the one that has brought by
      far the most visitors to my site is the word "torture".
    • Axel Berger
      ... No, tables are just as bad. Please go and take a look at http://axel.berger-odenthal.de/work/Sudel/Webdesign.htm and the sample page that links to -- and
      Message 2 of 20 , Jan 18, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        bensbach wrote:
        > I gather that frames are rather disparaged these days,
        > but the alternative until something better is widely
        > adopted would seem to be tables.

        No, tables are just as bad. Please go and take a look at

        http://axel.berger-odenthal.de/work/Sudel/Webdesign.htm

        and the sample page that links to -- and most of all follow the links to
        those people I have copied all the ideas from. They all give very good
        and comprehensive explanations.

        If I cared enough I could write code around the IE glitches, but I
        don't, and more importantly IE users don't care about quality anyway.
        All the main things work on all browsers anyway (including, I hope, pure
        text browsers, Braille readers and speach engines) and that is as it
        should be.

        > 3) The content of a table is fixed, while the content of
        > a frame can be changed with a mouse click

        I do that with server includes, which are just as simple if not more so.

        Axel
      • John Zeman
        I just took a quick look at the site you mentioned Eric and just off the top of my head if I were you I d consider dropping the frames altogether and using
        Message 3 of 20 , Jan 18, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I just took a quick look at the site you mentioned Eric and just off
          the top of my head if I were you I'd consider dropping the frames
          altogether and using iframes for the left side links instead. I did a
          gratis web site like that awhile back in the interests of community
          spirit, you can see it here if you're interested in the idea:
          http://barnquilts.com/

          No frames are involved anywhere and the iframes are only used for the
          links. From what I've seen on your site only one table would be
          needed for each page, at least I would use one to control the overall
          layout presentation.

          By the way, the link in your message has a typo I assume the real URL is
          http://www.rainbowends.org/
          And not
          http://www.rainbow ends.org/

          John

          --- In ntb-html@yahoogroups.com, "bensbach" <ericbj-mmvii@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Some days ago I did a little re-vamping and put some
          > additional documents on my website, on a server in the
          > UK. The changes cannot be seen here in Thailand. Going
          > on past experience it will take about a week for the
          > changes to become visible. Have been told that websites
          > are cached on servers around the world and these are only
          > "refreshed" every so often. (?) Anyway, I cannot yet see
          > what bugs the site may have, or even if it is there at
          > all.
          > Frustrating !
          >
          > The site, www.rainbow ends.org uses two vertical frames:
          > a narrow left-hand one to list content and to the right
          > of that the document being viewed.
          >
          > I gather that frames are rather disparaged these days,
          > but the alternative until something better is widely
          > adopted would seem to be tables.
          >
          > The problem with tables is:
          >
          > 1) I do not have time to go manually updating large
          > numbers of files every time the Contents changes
          > (optimistically, I hope to do this more often in future,
          > the site having been almost unchanged in seven years)
          >
          > 2) I do not have any programming skills to automate the
          > task.
          >
          > 3) The content of a table is fixed, while the content of
          > a frame can be changed with a mouse click
          >
          > At the foot of each document there is a link which now
          > goes to a Categories Page which links to several Contents
          > Pages. Each of the latter lists files that can be clicked
          > on and brought up in the Main Frame.
          >
          > Previously there was just a single Contents Page, listing
          > all documents (i.e. no Categories). But this made for a
          > long and rather indigestible list of documents, which
          > would have become longer still with additions.
          >
          > In the good old days, a person clicking on "Contents" at
          > the bottom of a page would see all the documents
          > available. If they came through the Front Page of the
          > site, they would see this in the Main Frame, and if they
          > came though a search-engine they would see it without any
          > frames. Doubtless there was a better way of doing this,
          > but at least there were no frames-within-frames.
          >
          > Now however, using modern browsers -- IE7 and Opera (not
          > having tried with the others) -- this no longer works
          > properly if one is not viewing the files from within
          > frames. Maybe TARGET="xxx" confuses the browser when
          > there is no TARGET="xxx".
          >
          > What happens is that the linked file is opened, but the
          > focus remains on the existing file.
          >
          > With Opera, a new tab appears, but most people would not
          > realise this and so would not click on it.
          >
          > With IE7, a new window opens, but this is often hidden
          > behind the existing window.
          >
          > One answer might be to take people to the Frameset page.
          > But is there is some way of preventing those already
          > viewing within frames from picking up another set of
          > frames ?
          >
          > Would this make the site less accessible to the search-
          > engines ?
          >
          > Despite the frames, which it has always had, five years
          > ago 65% of hits were via the search-engines -- although
          > it had never been promoted to them.
          >
          > Now however, perhaps as result of the site's content
          > remaining unchanged for so long, not only has the number
          > of visitors fallen off considerably, but the proportion
          > coming through the search engines has fallen to 35% of
          > the total.
          >
          > Your advice and comments would be much appreciated.
          >
          > Eric Johnston
          >
          > p.s. Of the search criteria, the one that has brought by
          > far the most visitors to my site is the word "torture".
          >
        • loro
          ... Have you tried to disable your ISPs proxy (if that s what it is about)? You do it in the browser settings. Otherwise, try to use a proxy located somewhere
          Message 4 of 20 , Jan 19, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            bensbach wrote:
            >Have been told that websites are cached on servers around the world
            >and these are only
            > "refreshed" every so often. (?) Anyway, I cannot yet see
            > what bugs the site may have, or even if it is there at
            > all.
            > Frustrating !

            Have you tried to disable your ISPs proxy (if that's what it is
            about)? You do it in the browser settings. Otherwise, try to use a
            proxy located somewhere else in the world. The cache that's bothering
            you should see it as a new URL then, and it won't have it cached. The
            first one I found with Google. Just type your URL in the box.
            <http://www.zend2.com/>

            >1) I do not have time to go manually updating large
            > numbers of files every time the Contents changes
            > (optimistically, I hope to do this more often in future,
            > the site having been almost unchanged in seven years)

            If that's why you use frames, tables isn't the solution. SSI (Server
            Side Includes) is. It isn't a programming language, more of a server
            feature. Special tags in the HTML get replaced with the content of a
            file before the server sends the page to the browser.

            An example.
            <!--#include virtual="/path/to/menu.txt" -->

            Then you put all the code for the menu in the file menu.txt and it
            will appear everywhere you put the above tag. Easy-peasy.

            The same thing can be done with PHP and other real programming
            languages, but SSI is easy and available on most servers.

            Lotta
          • Dave
            Hi just went to this site it is fine http://www.rainbowends.org/cadre.htm two frames just the way it should be?? THANKYOU DAVE M ... From: bensbach
            Message 5 of 20 , Jan 19, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi
              just went to this site it is fine
              http://www.rainbowends.org/cadre.htm two frames just the way it should be??
              THANKYOU DAVE M

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "bensbach" <ericbj-mmvii@...>
              To: <ntb-html@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 1:52 AM
              Subject: [NH] Frames


              >
              > Some days ago I did a little re-vamping and put some
              > additional documents on my website, on a server in the
              > UK. The changes cannot be seen here in Thailand. Going
              > on past experience it will take about a week for the
              > changes to become visible. Have been told that websites
              > are cached on servers around the world and these are only
              > "refreshed" every so often. (?) Anyway, I cannot yet see
              > what bugs the site may have, or even if it is there at
              > all.
              > Frustrating !
              >
              > The site, www.rainbow ends.org uses two vertical frames:
              > a narrow left-hand one to list content and to the right
              > of that the document being viewed.
              >
              > I gather that frames are rather disparaged these days,
              > but the alternative until something better is widely
              > adopted would seem to be tables.
              >
              > The problem with tables is:
              >
              > 1) I do not have time to go manually updating large
              > numbers of files every time the Contents changes
              > (optimistically, I hope to do this more often in future,
              > the site having been almost unchanged in seven years)
              >
              > 2) I do not have any programming skills to automate the
              > task.
              >
              > 3) The content of a table is fixed, while the content of
              > a frame can be changed with a mouse click
              >
              > At the foot of each document there is a link which now
              > goes to a Categories Page which links to several Contents
              > Pages. Each of the latter lists files that can be clicked
              > on and brought up in the Main Frame.
              >
              > Previously there was just a single Contents Page, listing
              > all documents (i.e. no Categories). But this made for a
              > long and rather indigestible list of documents, which
              > would have become longer still with additions.
              >
              > In the good old days, a person clicking on "Contents" at
              > the bottom of a page would see all the documents
              > available. If they came through the Front Page of the
              > site, they would see this in the Main Frame, and if they
              > came though a search-engine they would see it without any
              > frames. Doubtless there was a better way of doing this,
              > but at least there were no frames-within-frames.
              >
              > Now however, using modern browsers -- IE7 and Opera (not
              > having tried with the others) -- this no longer works
              > properly if one is not viewing the files from within
              > frames. Maybe TARGET="xxx" confuses the browser when
              > there is no TARGET="xxx".
              >
              > What happens is that the linked file is opened, but the
              > focus remains on the existing file.
              >
              > With Opera, a new tab appears, but most people would not
              > realise this and so would not click on it.
              >
              > With IE7, a new window opens, but this is often hidden
              > behind the existing window.
              >
              > One answer might be to take people to the Frameset page.
              > But is there is some way of preventing those already
              > viewing within frames from picking up another set of
              > frames ?
              >
              > Would this make the site less accessible to the search-
              > engines ?
              >
              > Despite the frames, which it has always had, five years
              > ago 65% of hits were via the search-engines -- although
              > it had never been promoted to them.
              >
              > Now however, perhaps as result of the site's content
              > remaining unchanged for so long, not only has the number
              > of visitors fallen off considerably, but the proportion
              > coming through the search engines has fallen to 35% of
              > the total.
              >
              > Your advice and comments would be much appreciated.
              >
              > Eric Johnston
              >
              > p.s. Of the search criteria, the one that has brought by
              > far the most visitors to my site is the word "torture".
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > NoteTab site: http://www.notetab.com/
              > Fookes Software site: http://www.fookes.com/
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • bensbach
              VERY MANY THANKS for all that information from you all. I have downloaded and saved pages from the links you provided and hope to find time to study the
              Message 6 of 20 , Jan 19, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                VERY MANY THANKS for all that information from
                you all.

                I have downloaded and saved pages from the
                links you provided and hope to find time to
                study the alternatives to frames.

                > bensbach wrote:
                > > Have been told that websites are cached on
                > > servers around the world and these are only
                > > "refreshed" every so often. (?) Anyway, I
                > > cannot yet see what bugs the site may have, or
                > > even if it is there at all.
                > > Frustrating !
                >
                > Have you tried to disable your ISPs proxy (if
                > that's what it is about)? You do it in the
                > browser settings. Otherwise, try to use a proxy
                > located somewhere else in the world. The cache
                > that's bothering you should see it as a new URL
                > then, and it won't have it cached. The first
                > one I found with Google. Just type your URL in
                > the box.
                > <http://www.zend2.com/>

                Lotta,
                I have not been able to find where to disable my
                ISP's proxy and have searched unsucessfully in
                help under "cache" and "fournisseur d'accès" (I
                have French versions of Opera and IE7).

                When I request a previously existing file, I
                see the old version which was changed nearly a
                week ago now. When I give the URL of a new
                file, I get a "404: not found" response. I do
                not have an ISP in the ordinary sense, here in
                Thailand, as my connection is via a GPRS modem
                using AIS's mobile 'phone network.
                (For example, they have no SMTP server. I have
                to configure my e-mail client to use the server
                of one or other of several ISPs to which I am
                not subscribed, such as loxinfo.com or
                cscoms.com. And that works over here, but I
                don't think it would with European ISPs!)

                I wish my updated site to be visible over here
                not only so as to see if things work alright
                (such as did I get my relative addresses right?
                -- been a long time since I previously wrote
                web-pages) but also so that others can see it.
                Little point in giving people in this part of
                the world the URL of a document if they can't
                then find it.

                I have tried using the Google cache, but the
                results are the same. Ditto with all the other
                proxies, except one which did not have the site.

                If you are not seeing on the Front Page the
                photos of Burma's three top ruling generals,
                you are not seeing the updated site,
                www.rainbowends.org

                Regards,
                Eric Johnston
              • loro
                ... From what you say, it doesn t sound like this is your problem, but for the record... If you haven t configured Opera to use a proxy, then I guess it
                Message 7 of 20 , Jan 20, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  bensbach wrote:
                  > I have not been able to find where to disable my
                  > ISP's proxy and have searched unsucessfully in
                  > help under "cache" and "fournisseur d'accès" (I
                  > have French versions of Opera and IE7).

                  From what you say, it doesn't sound like this is your problem, but
                  for the record...
                  If you haven't configured Opera to use a proxy, then I guess it
                  doesn't. But sometimes ISP's who make you install their services from
                  a CD automatically configure IE to use their proxy.
                  In IE it's here.
                  Tools | Internet Options | Connections | LAN | Proxy server
                  If you use dial-up it's somewhere similar. In Opera it's here.
                  http://www.opera.com/support/search/view/332/



                  > If you are not seeing on the Front Page the
                  > photos of Burma's three top ruling generals,
                  > you are not seeing the updated site,
                  > www.rainbowends.org

                  Nope, I see no photos at all and I have never visited your site
                  before. Are you absolutely sure the new files overwrote the old ones?
                  Have you downloaded for example index.html with FTP and checked it
                  really is the new file? I have heard that web hosts sometimes use
                  some kind of caching on the server, but I'd guess that's very
                  unusual. Have something like this happened before?

                  Lotta
                • Axel Berger
                  ... In that case it can t be a proxy cache problem. Are you sure it is not your server at fault here? ... I don t -- so it definitely is your server that does
                  Message 8 of 20 , Jan 20, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    bensbach wrote:
                    > When I give the URL of a new
                    > file, I get a "404: not found" response.

                    In that case it can't be a proxy cache problem. Are you sure it is not
                    your server at fault here?

                    > If you are not seeing on the Front Page the
                    > photos of Burma's three top ruling generals,
                    > you are not seeing the updated site,

                    I don't -- so it definitely is your server that does not update.
                    Is it possible that you don't FTP directly into your webspace but send
                    updates somewhere that someone has to insert manually and that they take
                    their time?

                    Axel
                  • bensbach
                    ... The site always had two frames. The question is this: Does index.html show you three portait photos of Burmese generals ? And do the frames it brings up
                    Message 9 of 20 , Jan 20, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > Hi
                      > just went to this site it is fine
                      > http://www.rainbowends.org/cadre.htm two frames
                      > just the way it should be??
                      > THANKYOU DAVE M

                      The site always had two frames. The question
                      is this:

                      Does index.html show you three portait photos
                      of Burmese generals ?

                      And do the frames it brings up show you, in the
                      righthand one, a text in English?

                      If not, you are seeing my 7-year old site.

                      > > If you are not seeing on the Front Page the
                      > > photos of Burma's three top ruling generals,
                      > > you are not seeing the updated site,
                      >
                      > I don't -- so it definitely is your server that
                      > does not update.
                      > Is it possible that you don't FTP directly into
                      > your webspace but send updates somewhere that
                      > someone has to insert manually and that they
                      > take their time?
                      >
                      > Axel

                      Thanks.

                      I'll get on to the company that is hosting my
                      site, www.skymarket.co.uk

                      When I first tried to update my site Sunday a
                      week ago, I was unable to do so: the FTP server
                      didn't recognise my login details. I checked
                      them and they were correct. It turned out the
                      company had lost my login!

                      After they gave me a new ID and password
                      everything went smoothly, at least as far as
                      concerns the uploading to the FTP server.

                      The log file showed everything was OK.

                      Moreover in the past week, since then, I have
                      added new files and modified others by
                      synchronising with the server. And the
                      synchronising process has indicated that all
                      the other files were on the server.

                      Maybe someone at the hosting company must
                      manually transfer the files from the FTP server
                      to the HTTP server? That is something I am
                      totally ignorant about.

                      I do remember that years ago when I uploaded
                      the odd file from France the changes were
                      visible within hours, but from Thailand it took
                      about a week for the changes to become visible.

                      But if no-one is seeing the new site, there
                      must be something drastically wrong.

                      Thanks again.

                      Eric Johnston
                    • Axel Berger
                      ... This is not as it should be. When I upload I can see the changes right away and so can the W3C validator. If it were not so, how could I ever debug? In
                      Message 10 of 20 , Jan 20, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        bensbach wrote:
                        > I do remember that years ago when I uploaded
                        > the odd file from France the changes were
                        > visible within hours, but from Thailand it took
                        > about a week for the changes to become visible.

                        This is not as it should be. When I upload I can see the changes right
                        away and so can the W3C validator. If it were not so, how could I ever
                        debug? In very rare cases my own browser cache jumps in and hides
                        changes, but that only happens with stylesheets or scripts, never with
                        the site itself.

                        Axel
                      • bensbach
                        I have been in contact with my website hosting company s technical support, but up to now the mystery of where my uploaded files can be remains unresolved, as
                        Message 11 of 20 , Jan 21, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I have been in contact with my website hosting
                          company's technical support, but up to now the
                          mystery of where my uploaded files can be
                          remains unresolved, as the hosting company,
                          skymarket.co.uk cannot find them on its
                          servers. But my FTP client can see them.

                          I give below the exchange of messages.

                          Anyone any suggestions?

                          ME:
                          After the small problem with logging in to the
                          FTP server was resolved I successfully uploaded
                          my new files, on Tuesday 15th January. The log
                          file showed this was accomplished successfully.
                          Since then I have uploaded new and modified
                          files by synchronisation with the FTP server.
                          The synchronisation process has shown that the
                          previously uploaded files are present on the
                          server.
                          However I am not seeing the new site in my
                          browsers.
                          [...]

                          HOST:
                          Which domain are you having issues with?

                          ME:
                          www.rainbowends.org
                          This is my only domain.

                          HOST:
                          I have looked at that hosting and it was last
                          updated in 2003.
                          Can you confirm the FTP information you are
                          using. Host, user and pass please.

                          ME:
                          I have been using as my "FTP Neighbourhood":
                          www.rainbowends.org and my user i/d and
                          password are as given to me by you, as below.

                          HOST:
                          I have logged into FTP using that information
                          and I see the same files as before, the ones
                          that haven't been updated since 2003.
                          The problem appears to be in your uploading
                          process somewhere, as your new files are not
                          being uploaded.

                          ME:
                          My new files must be on your server somewhere,
                          surely?
                          Please see below.
                          I have connected using this time a different
                          FTP client, SmartFTP instead of that included
                          with HotMetal Pro v.6.
                          It sees all the new files and folders. When I
                          cut the Internet connection it sees them no
                          longer so it cannot be seeing something on my
                          computer. It must be on the web at
                          212.84.161.99. Is that right?
                          ________________________________
                          [22:40:54] SmartFTP v2.5.1008.27
                          [22:40:55] Resolving host name "www.rainbowends.org"
                          [22:40:57] Connecting to 212.84.161.99 Port: 21
                          [22:40:57] Connected to www.rainbowends.org.
                          [22:41:03] 220 ProFTPD 1.2.10 Server (Cougar FTP
                          Service) [212.84.161.99]
                          [22:41:03] USER rainbowe
                          [22:41:05] 331 Password required for rainbowe.
                          [22:41:05] PASS (hidden)
                          [22:41:06] 230 User rainbowe logged in.
                          [22:41:06] SYST
                          [22:41:07] 215 UNIX Type: L8
                          [22:41:07] Detected Server Type: UNIX
                          [22:41:07] FEAT
                          [22:41:08] 211-Features:
                          [22:41:08] MDTM
                          [22:41:10] REST STREAM
                          [22:41:10] SIZE
                          [22:41:10] 211 End
                          [22:41:10] PWD
                          [22:41:12] 257 "/" is current directory.
                          [22:41:12] CWD www.rainbowends.org
                          [22:41:14] 250 CWD command successful
                          [22:41:14] PWD
                          [22:41:17] 257 "/www.rainbowends.org" is current directory.
                          [22:41:17] TYPE A
                          [22:41:19] 200 Type set to A
                          [22:41:19] PASV
                          [22:41:20] 227 Entering Passive Mode (212,84,161,99,226,215).
                          [22:41:20] Opening data connection to 212.84.161.99 Port: 58071
                          [22:41:20] LIST -aL
                          [22:41:22] 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for file list
                          [22:41:22] 1379 bytes transferred. (1,69 Ko/s) (796 ms)
                          [22:41:23] 226 Transfer complete.
                          [22:41:53] NOOP
                          [22:41:57] 200 NOOP command successful
                          [22:42:27] NOOP
                          [22:42:29] 200 NOOP command successful
                          [22:42:59] NOOP
                          [22:43:01] 200 NOOP command successful
                          [22:43:32] NOOP
                          [22:43:35] 200 NOOP command successful
                          [22:43:40] CWD /www.rainbowends.org/mmviii
                          [22:43:43] 250 CWD command successful
                          [22:43:43] PWD
                          [22:43:46] 257 "/www.rainbowends.org/mmviii" is current directory.
                          [22:43:46] PASV
                          [22:43:48] 227 Entering Passive Mode (212,84,161,99,227,88).
                          [22:43:48] Opening data connection to 212.84.161.99 Port: 58200
                          [22:43:48] LIST -aL
                          [22:43:55] 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for file list
                          [22:43:55] 1350 bytes transferred. (394 octets/s) (00:00:03)
                          [22:43:58] 226 Transfer complete.
                          [22:44:28] NOOP
                          [22:44:32] 200 NOOP command successful
                          [22:44:46] Une connexion établie a été abandonnée par un logiciel de
                          votre ordinateur hôte.
                          [22:44:46] Server closed connection




                          --- In ntb-html@yahoogroups.com, Axel Berger <Axel-Berger@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > bensbach wrote:
                          > > I do remember that years ago when I uploaded
                          > > the odd file from France the changes were
                          > > visible within hours, but from Thailand it took
                          > > about a week for the changes to become visible.
                          >
                          > This is not as it should be. When I upload I can see the changes
                          right
                          > away and so can the W3C validator. If it were not so, how could I
                          ever
                          > debug? In very rare cases my own browser cache jumps in and hides
                          > changes, but that only happens with stylesheets or scripts, never
                          with
                          > the site itself.
                          >
                          > Axel
                          >
                        • bensbach
                          The website hosters have found MY mistake. I had uploaded not only the files intended for the website but also the folder they are contained in. The name of
                          Message 12 of 20 , Jan 21, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            The website hosters have found MY mistake.
                            I had uploaded not only the files intended
                            for the website but also the folder they
                            are contained in. The name of that folder
                            is www.rainbowends.org so the mistake was
                            not obvious at first site.

                            My apologies for troubling you all.

                            Eric Johnston


                            --- In ntb-html@yahoogroups.com, "bensbach" <ericbj-mmvii@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > I have been in contact with my website hosting
                            > company's technical support, but up to now the
                            > mystery of where my uploaded files can be
                            > remains unresolved, as the hosting company,
                            > skymarket.co.uk cannot find them on its
                            > servers. But my FTP client can see them.
                            >
                            > I give below the exchange of messages.
                            >
                            > Anyone any suggestions?
                          • Axel Berger
                            ... Using FTP: Can you see the old files, those that are displayed through HTTP, in the self-same directory. If so you uploadd to the right place. Is your
                            Message 13 of 20 , Jan 21, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              bensbach wrote:
                              > Anyone any suggestions?

                              Using FTP: Can you see the old files, those that are displayed through
                              HTTP, in the self-same directory. If so you uploadd to the right place.

                              Is your capitalization correct for all the new file names? And have you
                              made sure that none of them contains any accented French letters that
                              are not part of standard US 7-bit ASCII?

                              Axel
                            • Axel Berger
                              ... No problem, glad it s solved. N.B: I recommend the Totalcommander for FTP (among very many other things). It makes things like that very easy to spot. Axel
                              Message 14 of 20 , Jan 21, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                bensbach wrote:
                                > My apologies for troubling you all.

                                No problem, glad it's solved.
                                N.B: I recommend the Totalcommander for FTP (among very many other
                                things). It makes things like that very easy to spot.

                                Axel
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.