My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 13, 9:22 am, Andy Dingley <ding...@codesm iths.comwrote:

>
>
You know what that's caused by? Case issues in filenames. Sometimes "
" space characters in filenames not being encoded correctly in URLs
(although browsers usually compensate for that).
>
Your desktop is almost certainly Windows (case-insensitive filenames).
Your web server filesystem is almost certainly Unix (case-sensitive
filenames). Your web server is probably (unless they deliberately
change this) also case-sensitive in URLs.
>
So when you test with a local filename that has the wrong case, your
Windows system doesn't care and it all works.
>
You upload this to the server (now case-sensitive) and it fails.

Huh? Sorry, but case-sensitivity does not appear to be the issue
here. It's an interesting point you raise, which I note for my future
reference, thank you kindly, but I don't see how it applies to my
situation, since my file names are all lower-case, as was every
reference to them in my src attributes...an d besides, surely a webhost
should have provided for such matters anyway.

You talk to tech support, and you both talk yourself into this cargo-
cult

LOL -- SBI! as a cargo-cult! It's more true than not, yes...I was
actually thinking of that Heaven's Gate cult of suicidal UFO-believing
website designers from the '90s....

>that it's using an absolute path that's the trick. You get this
absolute path by browsing to the directory with the files in (through
the web server), seeing a list of file URLs (generated by the server,
so the case is correct) and you then copy and paste one of these.

????

Two things have happened: you've switched from relative to absolute
(obvious, but unimportant) and you've also corrected the case of the
filename in the URL (easily ignored but crucial). _That's_ why "it
started working when you went to absolute paths".

I apologize, Andy, but I know nothing about servers, so I'm not able
to place your remarks in a useful context vis-a-vis my situation...if
you don't mind, would you please do a step-by-step "chronology " of the
chain of events? I honestly don't know how to "parse" your
statements; I don't know how servers work and it sounds like you're
referring to how they work....

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 12, 11:41 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4...@centra l.netwrote:

>
>
No, but you have to have your relative paths correct...

Look, look at this: http://ego-management.org/test.html -- look at the
HTML/JavaScript.

Notice that my image-swap now works?

The **only** thing that's different now from when it didn't work is
that the first src attribute in the <imgtag has an absolute file
path name.

It's got nothing to do with whether my path names were correct -- they
were; they just were in relative format, whereas due to a bug in their
CMS they need the first one to be in absolute format when used as an
image-swap.

Huh?

Okay are you sure the uploaded images are not corrupted? Upload as ASCII
and not BINARY can do it. In a different path. Case error on filename, a
common Windows user error. On local Windows drive example.jpg,
ExAmPlE.JpG and example.JPG are all the same, but no on a live
webserver.

No, none of that was the reason. It was "simply" their CMS not seeing
the first src attribute unless that first src attribute was in
absolute file path format.

If the images are of significant size and a slow connection
or server you may not see the change when to crudely place the image
load in a onMouseOver onMouseOut attribute, Far better to preload. Let
me see, been a while since I have fiddle with JavaScript image swaps

I took out preloading, timed animation, cursor graphics changes, etc.,
because I wanted to help clarify the issue for tech support. That's
why http://ego-management.org/test.html is called "test," and why it's
a very simple <html><head><ti tle></title></head><body><img /></body></
htmlaffair.

Uh...thanks, but that would certainly have confused tech support.
Remember that they (and even you people!) kept thinking I was asking
for programming help!

I'm not.

I'm asking why a program that works from off my hard drive doesn't
work from off their server.

But for some reason when people see code they just assume the problem
is due to the code -- as opposed to however the CMS or whatever is
parsing that code.

It turns out that their CMS has a bug which causes it to ignore the
first src attribute of an image-swap, thus killing the image-swap,
unless that src attribute is in absolute file path name format.

And that's just the final straw for me.

I don't want to maybe spend more time figuring out any other strange
little things particular to them, later on.

I'm still almost sorry to have to cancel them, as they are good in
other ways, but as a webhost...nahh, just too much one thing after
another (unless you just turn off your brain and use their cookie-
cutter webpage maker widget).

--
Take care,
>
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIOhttp://www.LittleWorks Studio.com

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 13, 6:32 am, Andy Dingley <ding...@codesm iths.comwrote:

>
>
The simplest explanation, and this is backed up by long empirical
studies conducted by _anyone_ who has supported users, is that what
you're describing to us doesn't bear too much relation to the actual
reality. That's the first lesson of supporting users, and just one
reason why you don't touch such issues with a bargepole unless you can
get your _own_ hands on the same code, in the same context.

IOW, the so-called "availabili ty heuristic" -- assessing the
individual situation at hand based on the examples that come most
readily to mind.

Stereotyping, in short. The pre-conceptions you've brought made you
see things that weren't there. Just like how the SBI! CMS has certain
"pre-conceptions" programmed into it that made it not see things that
*are* there.

Why their CMS needs to see absolute file paths is strange -- but
stranger still is why it's only the first src that needs it; moreover,
only in the case of an image-swap -- everything else in standard
relative path format works!

For $300 a year, this is just too silly for me to deal with,
especially since it's taken two weeks to diagnose. What next? No
blue text in a <h3>??

In your last reply to me you claimed that setting an onmouseover event
to a URL for an image somehow "works", so long as it's on your
machine, or it's on the host's (and uses an absolute path). Despite
this clearly _not_ being what your example does.

Uhhh...I guess we're stumbling over semantics, then.

Look at the code for http://www.ego-management.org/test.html and tell
me what is wrong with it. I don't mean from a "good practices" POV;
merely what would cause it to not work.

It works, doesn't it?

Yet the ***only*** thing that's different from what hadn't worked
before was that the first src attribute of the <imgtag was in
relative file path format -- like the other src attributes still are,
incidentally.

What's your explanation for that? Why does the same exact code work
now, only with an absolute file path -- and only on that first src
attribute?

Now if this _is_
true, that's news to the W3C: this stuff just doesn't work quite that
way. So my only conclusion has to be that there's some vagueness
creeping in between the code that's failing to work, and the code
you're reporting to us for diagnosis. No one is "wrong" here, it's
just like trying to work at too long range, wearing thick gloves and
dark glasses.

What I was aghast over was people's attitude that the issue was not
something my webhost had a responsibility to resolve -- their own
attitude initially, too -- despite my repeated declarations that the
situation is not about programming help for invalid code, but why
valid code (strict W3C "good practices" aside) should work off my hard
drive but not off their servers.

This is also why most posters here insist on URLs, rather than posted
fragments.

I've given a URL: http://ego-management.org/test.html -- see how it's
as simple as I've said all along, isn't it: notice how the first src
attribute is in absolute file path format, but not the others?

That URL wasn't working until that one change was made -- that's all;
just that one little thing.

Sorry, SBI! -- I'd loved you, but you just keep getting more and more
weird on me!

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 12, 10:07 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailb ox-
sicur...@yahoo. com.auwrote:

>
>
But you don't even understand baysic things like how to size images
properly for the web which is baysic stuff.

Huh???

Wow, what a nit-picking non sequitur...shou ld I point out your poor
spelling as a reason to discount what you have to say??

And just what is it you have to say? How have you added to the
conversation??

It's precisely because I do not know that I've come to ask for advice.

If you have something relevant to the matter at hand, please share it.

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 12, 10:32 pm, shawn <javaforh...@gm ail.comwrote:

This whole thread is either somebody's desire to waste developer's
time, or an attempt to discredit the host. This lil tangent has gone
too far. I thought this was a group devoted to JavaScript.

I posted to CLJ originally because my situation seemed to involve
JavaScript -- at least that's what the webhost was initially saying,
that it was my invalid code and not something the matter with how they
host websites. So I posted to CLP to see if someone might find that
there was indeed something the matter with my code.

Turns out it's something to do with their CMS. That it's taken two
weeks for them to determine that is but another fact speaking for
itself. If my review of the webhost is negative, it is due to the
accumulation of such facts.

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 12, 10:41 pm, "Andrew Heenan" <andr...@heenan .netwrote:

>
>
Which group do you mean?
>
You have posted to FIVE groups.

=)

Look, everyone, I'm sorry that it seems my thread and the problem it
documents is taking up some much bandwidth (or whatever) -- I was
hoping to solicit a wide range of opinions, as well as establish a
"public record" where it would seem relevant to do so. Please
consider all this as just a public-service kind of consumer advisory.

--
>
Andrew
>
UK Residents:
STOP THE "10p Tax Ripoff"
Sign the petition to stop the government stealing from the
very poorest tell your friends about this petition:http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/10penceband/

**Chaddy2222** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

Prisoner at War wrote:

On May 12, 10:07 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailb ox-
sicur...@yahoo. com.auwrote:

But you don't even understand baysic things like how to size images
properly for the web which is baysic stuff.

>
Huh???
>
Wow, what a nit-picking non sequitur...shou ld I point out your poor
spelling as a reason to discount what you have to say??
>
And just what is it you have to say? How have you added to the
conversation??
>
It's precisely because I do not know that I've come to ask for advice.
>

Yep, I do understand that. Mind you I think what I am trying to say is
that you should do a bit more reading on baysic web design issues.
Such as not adding things to your pages that do not need to be there.
Mind you it is all a learning thing and with the way that the web is
changeing all the time it can be hard to stay on top of things. But
the simple stuff does not change that much.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

I'm an idiot, and yet you do exactly as I do and cross-post in your
turn.

What a hypocrite to boot!

These newsgroups are not "irrelevant"... the only thing irrelevant is
your constant bitching over my consumer complaint. I had to come to
usenet 'cause I couldn't trust that SBI! knew what the hell they're
talking about anymore. I don't know why that should upset you, unless
"Jerry Stuckle" is just JavaScript for
onLoad="documen t.head.setAttri bute('stupid')" ....

This thread concerns webhosts (thus, AP and AWW), consumers (MC),
website development (CIWAH), and originally maybe JavaScript (CLP).

If you can't be bothered to help, please just do yourself a favor and
stop following this thread.

On May 13, 11:52 am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attg lobal.netwrote:

>
>
Yea, unfortunately, the idiot crossposted to a bunch of other irrelevant
newsgroups.
>
With everything else in the thread - enough said.
>
--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 13, 6:37 am, Andy Dingley <ding...@codesm iths.comwrote:

>
>
Wasn't it something like "Cronin's 14th Law of Dotcom" that you should
never trust a dot-com company that uses exclamation marks in their
company name?

If only it were limited to their name! Their whole branding strategy
seems to involve exclamation points...they have online modules
("widgets") called SearchIt!, FindIt!, BrainstormIt!, FastUploadIt!,
SiteBlogIt!, BuildIt!, FormBuildIt!... .

I know it's all very hokey and late-night-TV-infomercial-y but hey I'm
a newbie and it seemed as good as any place to start...their citing
the University of Arizona and The Citadel as being among their
subscribers meant a lot to me, and their money-back guarantee seemed
fair, even generous, and safe....

I'd still recommend them, but only for people who don't really care
how their website looks and have absolutely no interest in "web
development mechanics"...th ey're not turn-key automation, though they
try to suggest that, but they are probably as close as could be come
to that short of hiring someone to do it for you.

Part of the reason why I'm being public about all this is that you
can't find an honest review of them on the web. They're not a bad
company, AFAIK, but it's very strange how you can't find a single
negative review of them (not on either side of 30 SERPs, anyway),
either, so hopefully this thread will prove of some future use in a
sea of sales landing pages.

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 13, 1:05 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailb ox-
sicur...@yahoo. com.auwrote:

>
>
Yep, I do understand that. Mind you I think what I am trying to say is
that you should do a bit more reading on baysic web design issues.
Such as not adding things to your pages that do not need to be there.

That's my life-philosophy, my Weltanschauung, even; I don't even have
a phone (none whatsoever) 'cause I don't really need it. "Minimalism "
and "less is more" are personal ideals to live by!

But this situation has nothing to do with those issues. I'm not
asking for aesthetic judgments on whether an '90s-style image-swap is
advisable; I was asking how could valid code that works off my hard
drive not work off the webhost's server. I had no "intellectu al
framework" in which to imagine such a possibility until, thanks to
this thread, I learned about something called Content Management
Software....

Mind you it is all a learning thing and with the way that the web is
changeing all the time it can be hard to stay on top of things. But
the simple stuff does not change that much.

I just got "DOM Scripting" last week and I'm almost halfway through it
(though digestion and actual grokking will be considerably longer, of
course).

--
Regards Chad.http://freewebdesignonline.org

**Jonathan N. Little** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

Prisoner at War wrote:

On May 12, 11:41 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4...@centra l.netwrote:

>>
>No, but you have to have your relative paths correct...

>
Look, look at this: http://ego-management.org/test.html -- look at the
HTML/JavaScript.
>
Notice that my image-swap now works?
>
The **only** thing that's different now from when it didn't work is
that the first src attribute in the <imgtag has an absolute file
path name.
>
It's got nothing to do with whether my path names were correct -- they
were; they just were in relative format, whereas due to a bug in their
CMS they need the first one to be in absolute format when used as an
image-swap.

That make no sense at all. If you properly use a relative path to your
Document Root (which on a webserver you have, but on a local file system
you don't) is will work. With your page, if the image is in the folder
"image-files" off of your document root and the webpage is in your
document root then:

http://www.ego-management.org/image-files/awww4.png

image-files/awww4.png
../image-files/awww4.png
/image-files/awww4.png

would all display the image. Don't believe me? Create a file
"test2.html " in your document root and paste this code.

<html><head><ti tle>4 Dogs</title></head>
<body>
<h1>See 4 Dogs</h1>
<ol>
<li>
<img src="http://www.ego-management.org/image-files/awww4.png" alt="one">
</li>
<li>
<img src="image-files/awww4.png" alt="two">
</li>
</li>
<li>
<img src="./image-files/awww4.png" alt="two">
</li>
</li>
<li>
<img src="/image-files/awww4.png" alt="two">
</li>
</ol>
</body></html>

>

><snipped signature YOU SHOULD BE DOING THIS >

>
Huh?
>

Time to learn how to post on Usenet.

netiquette posting on Usenet - Google Search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=mozilla&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=netiquette+posting+on+Usenet&spell=1

netiquette posting on Usenet - Google Search

>Okay are you sure the uploaded images are not corrupted? Upload as ASCII
>and not BINARY can do it. In a different path. Case error on filename, a
>common Windows user error. On local Windows drive example.jpg,
>ExAmPlE.JpG and example.JPG are all the same, but no on a live
>webserver.

>
No, none of that was the reason. It was "simply" their CMS not seeing
the first src attribute unless that first src attribute was in
absolute file path format.

What CMS? Are to publishing though from sort of frontend? Can you not
compose in plain text editor, like Notepad then FTP the page to the server?

>

>If the images are of significant size and a slow connection
>or server you may not see the change when to crudely place the image
>load in a onMouseOver onMouseOut attribute, Far better to preload. Let
>me see, been a while since I have fiddle with JavaScript image swaps

>
I took out preloading, timed animation, cursor graphics changes, etc.,
because I wanted to help clarify the issue for tech support. That's
why http://ego-management.org/test.html is called "test," and why it's
a very simple <html><head><ti tle></title></head><body><img /></body></
htmlaffair.
>

><script type="text/javascript">
>>
>var pix as new Object;
>>
>pix['imageID1']=new Array;
>pix['imageID1'][0]=new Image;
>pix['imageID1'][0].src='someimage off.gif';
>pix['imageID1'][1]=new Image;
>pix['imageID1'][1].src='someimage on.gif';
>// next image
>pix['imageID2']=new Array;
>pix['imageID2'][0]=new Image;
>...
>>
>function swap(id,state){
> var target=document .getElementById (id);
> target.src=pix[id][state].src;}
>>
></script>
>>
>In HTML:
>>
><img id="imageID1" src="someimageo ff.gif' alt="the target image">
>>
>...
>>
><some_elemen t onmouseover="sw ap('imageID1',1 );"
>onmouseout="sw ap('imageID1',0 );" ... >

>
Uh...thanks, but that would certainly have confused tech support.
Remember that they (and even you people!) kept thinking I was asking
for programming help!

A hosting company will not debug your scripts. At least not for free...
<snip>

Note, answer to question about trimming signatures. Below is my
signature which you have quoted. Don't. Remove my signature, real
newsreaders do this automatically. But don't snip quotes attributes for
quotes that you leave in. You see this thread as one long web page, that
is not how it looks in a newsreader.

>

>--
>Take care,
>>
>Jonathan
>-------------------
>LITTLE WORKS STUDIOhttp://www.LittleWorks Studio.com

>

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO

Little Works Studio Site Maintainance

http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

**Prisoner at War** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 13, 3:11 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4...@centra l.netwrote:

>
>
That make no sense at all. If you properly use a relative path to your
Document Root (which on a webserver you have, but on a local file system
you don't) is will work. With your page, if the image is in the folder
"image-files" off of your document root and the webpage is in your
document root then:
>

http://www.ego-management.org/image-files/awww4.png

image-files/awww4.png
./image-files/awww4.png
/image-files/awww4.png
>
would all display the image. Don't believe me? Create a file
"test2.html " in your document root and paste this code.
>
<html><head><ti tle>4 Dogs</title></head>
<body>
<h1>See 4 Dogs</h1>
<ol>
<li>
<img src="http://www.ego-management.org/image-files/awww4.png" alt="one">
</li>
<li>
<img src="image-files/awww4.png" alt="two">
</li>
</li>
<li>
<img src="./image-files/awww4.png" alt="two">
</li>
</li>
<li>
<img src="/image-files/awww4.png" alt="two">
</li>
</ol>
</body></html>

I'm sorry, I don't even know what you mean to say.

Why should the first src attribute be in absolute path format?

Time to learn how to post on Usenet.
>
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c...rg.mozilla:en-...
netiquette posting on Usenet - Google Search

Ah, so you were referring to your .sig not being trimmed.

Tell me, why do you have a .sig if you want other people to trim it?
Just don't have a .sig at all, then, if you don't want people to see
it!

What CMS? Are to publishing though from sort of frontend? Can you not
compose in plain text editor, like Notepad then FTP the page to the server?

The CMS on their side...apparent ly, they use some kind of CMS to host
the websites they do...they're not just a regular standard webhost; I
can't just FTP up an image or something; I can only send up an .html
document through a specific widget of theirs, and only then upload
images ***if*** the webpage specifically calls for them...it's very
weird and awkward and ham-fisted since their system was not designed
for people to create their own HTML -- but they try to accommodate
those who don't want to use their online widgets for website creation
(since that results in a "cookie-cutter look")...unfort unately,
there's at least one bug in their CMS, such that a simple image-swap
can occasion such a fuss....

A hosting company will not debug your scripts. At least not for free...
<snip>

Jesus F. Christ -- I AM NOT asking them for programming help!!! I
HAVE NEVER asked them for programming help!!! What don't you
understand between code that works in my browser when loaded from my
hard drive, and ***the same exact code*** not working in my browser
when loaded from their server!!

Please get your head around that! Otherwise you are heading towards a
wholly different conversation than what I'm having here!!

Note, answer to question about trimming signatures. Below is my
signature which you have quoted. Don't. Remove my signature, real
newsreaders do this automatically. But don't snip quotes attributes for
quotes that you leave in. You see this thread as one long web page, that
is not how it looks in a newsreader.

Geez, why should I be responsible for the fact that your software
can't do what seems a most logical thing, which is to display a thread
as a tree??

Why should I be responsible for trimming text (your .sig) that you
want to put in??

Why would you even use a .sig if you want people to redact it out????

<SNIP>

There, Happy Birthday! =\

**Disco Octopus** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On May 14, 3:01 am, Prisoner at War <prisoner_at_.. .@yahoo.comwrot e:

>
It turns out now that SBI! has a bug in their CMS which requires the
first src attribute of an <imgtag involved in an image-swap to use
the absolute file path name format, while everything else can remain
relative.

That is interesting. I have seen this before in some WYSIWYG inline
editors. Would they be using something called tiny_mce or something
like that? I think that there is a flag in the configuration of this
WYSIWYG editor that says to "resolve paths when saving content" or
"dont resolve paths". Just a guess and a thought from past experience
with these types of tools.

**Chaddy2222** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

Prisoner at War wrote:

On May 13, 1:05 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailb ox-
sicur...@yahoo. com.auwrote:

Yep, I do understand that. Mind you I think what I am trying to say is
that you should do a bit more reading on baysic web design issues.
Such as not adding things to your pages that do not need to be there.

>
That's my life-philosophy, my Weltanschauung, even; I don't even have
a phone (none whatsoever) 'cause I don't really need it. "Minimalism "
and "less is more" are personal ideals to live by!
>
But this situation has nothing to do with those issues. I'm not
asking for aesthetic judgments on whether an '90s-style image-swap is
advisable; I was asking how could valid code that works off my hard
drive not work off the webhost's server.

By not actually being valid code. Read about quirks vs standards mode
and gain a good understanding of it before doing anything. It can have
a large impact on how your pages work on the web.
For a start your page does not have a doctype, give it one and
validate your pages. DO NOT use XHTML I have set my editor to not use
it for all new sites that I develop. Google for the reasons why you
should not use it.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

<snip>

**Andy Dingley** · Jun 27 '08, 07:15 PM

Re: My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

On 13 May, 17:43, Prisoner at War <prisoner_at_.. .@yahoo.comwrot e:

Why their CMS needs to see absolute file paths is strange -- but
stranger still is why it's only the first src that needs it;

So swap it back to being a relative filepath. Now that it's working, I
bet that it will _continue_ to work when you change this. That's
because this wasn't ever the problem at all.

Maybe you'll think it's "stereotypi ng" when I tell you that this is a
very common situation in user support. This is also why you always aim
to get a simple example _working_ first, then modify it gradually to
do what you need (whilst also keeping it working). Changing something
that's working is so much easier than fixing something that isn't
working.

I don't know why it didn't (past tense) work, but I doubt _VERY_ much
if it was to do with absolute paths. It just doesn't work that way.
Something else caused the problem, you didn't notice quite what it was
that fixed it, it just happened at the same time. Now switch the path
(and ONLY the path) back to being relative, and I bet it will still
keep on working.

Welcome to user support. That's what it consists of day in, day out.
This is how cargo cults develop.

Look at the code for <http://www.ego-management.org/test.htmland tell
me what is wrong with it.

It works, doesn't it?

No one is disputing that, merely that it could also be different
(relative path), yet still work.

My Very Strange Webhost, SBI! -- Opinions, Please

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment