PHP and today's generation of web technologies.

[crouse]

PHP and today's generation of web technologies.

What's next in the field of web design? It's already here. Today's webmasters are deluged with available technologies to incorporate into their designs. The ability to learn everything is fast becoming an impossiblity. So your choice in design technologies becomes increasingly important if you don't want to be the last man standing and left behind when everyone else has moved on. But before we get to that, lets do a quick review of the previous generation of web design.

The first generation of design would have to be called the STATIC generation. In the static generation of web design, pages were mostly html pages that relied soley on static text and images to relay they information over the internet. The first generation of web pages lacked x and y coordinate positioning, and relied on hand coded tables for somewhat accurate placement of images and text. Simple, and straight to the point, webdesign was more like writing a book and publishing it online. Although there are still a few static sites out there, the more proffesional sites have of course kept up with technology, which brings us to this generation of webdesign.

The second generation of web design (the one we are in now), would be considered the ACTIVE generation. For quite awhile now the internet has been drifting towards interactive web designs which allow users a more personal and dynamic experience when visiting websites. No longer is a great website simply a bunch of static text and images. A great website is now one which allows, indeed, encourages user interaction. From simple guestbooks to advanced user forums and image galleries, user s are expecting to have more interactions when visiting websites. The jobs of the webmasters everywhere have just gotten more difficult. No longer does knowing HTML inside out make you a webmaster, although that does help a great deal!! Now, knowing how to use interactive technologies isn't just helpful, it's almost a requirement. Here are a few of the interactive technologies available for the webmasters of today.

Technologies on the client side :

1.Active X Controls.
Developed by Microsoft these are only fully functional on the Internet Explorer web browser . This eliminates them from being cross platform, and thus eliminates them from being a webmasters number one technology choice for the future. Disabling Active X Controls on the IE web browser is something many people do for security, as the platform has been used by many for unethical and harmful things.

2.Java Applets
Java Applets are programs that are written in the Java Language. They are self contained and are supported on cross platform web browsers. While not all browsers work with Java Applets, many do. These can be included in web pages in almost the same way images can.

3.Dhtml and Client-Side Scripting
This catagorey covers an array of useful languages. DHTML, javascript, and vbscript. They all have in common the fact that all the code is transmitted with the original webpage and the web browser translates the code and creates pages that are much more dynamic than static html pages. Vbscript is only supported by Internet Explorer. That again makes for a bad choice for the web designer wanting to create cross platform web pages. With Linux and other operating systems gaining in popularity, it makes little sense to lock yourself into one platform.

Of all the client side options available javascript has proved to be the most popular and most widely used. So once your an expert with HTML, I recommend javascript for your next learning experience. Unless of course you prefer to just jump to the next level and skip the client side options altogether. That wouldn't neccesarily be an entirely bad idea in my opinion either.


Technologies on the server side:

1.CGI
This stands for Common Gateway Interface. It wasn't all that long ago that the only dynamic solution for webmasters was CGI. Almost every webserver in use today supports CGI in one form or another. The most widely used CGI language is Perl. Python, C, and C++ can also be used as CGI programming languages, but are not nearly as popular as Perl. The biggest disadvantage to CGI for the server side is in it's lack of scalability. Although mod_perl for Apache and Fast CGI attempt to help improve performance in this department, CGI is probably not the future of web design because of this very problem.

2.ASP
Another of Microsoft's attempt's to "improve" things. ASP is a proprietary scripting language. Performance is best on Microsoft's own servers of course, and the lack of widespread COM support has reduced the number of webmasters willing to bet the farm on another one of Microsoft's silver bullets.

3.JavaServer Pages and Java Servlets
Server side javascript is Netscapes answer to Microsoft's ASP technology. Since this technology is supported almost exclusively on the Netscape Enterprise Sever, the likelyhood that this will ever become a serious contender in the battle for the webmaster's attention is highly unlikely.

4.PHP
Perhaps the biggest diamond in the rough is PHP. Developed in 1994, PHP works very similar to the way that ASP works. However, quite unlike ASP, PHP is totally platform independent and there are versions for most operating systems and servers. The most helpful feature in gaining widespread acceptance is the fact that it's free and Open Source. PHP is definitely my choice for the future of web design for the forseeable future.

The benefits of using PHP server side proccessing include the following.

1.Reduces network traffic.
2.Avoids cross platform issues with operating systems and web browsers.
3.Can sent data to the client that isn't on the client computer.
4.Quicker loading time. After the server interprets all the php code, the resulting page is transmitted as HTML.
5.Security is increased, since things can be coded into PHP that will never be viewed from the browser.

While Flash, Active X, and other proprietary elements will continue to creep in and entice webmasters, in the end, compatibility issues and price of development will dictate what eventually win out in the next generation of web design. However, for the forseeable future PHP, HTML, and databases are going to be in the future of interactive web design, and that's where I'm placing my bets. Open Source continues to play an important role in driving web technologies. Even though Microsoft would like to be the only player on the field, Open Source, with it's flexibility will almost certainly be the winner in the end. Betting the farm on LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySql, PHP) seems much wiser to me than the alternative (Microsoft, IIS, Asp) ... not to mention it's a much less expensive route to follow.

Original Article Posted :http://www.usalug.org/
Written by Crouse ... UsaLug site administrator.

Useful References
http://www.usalug.org
http://www.php.net
http://www.php.net/tut.php
http://www.php.net/docs.php
http://www.zend.com
http://www.apache.org
http://www.linux.org
http://mysql.com
http://www.hotscripts.com

[mmmna]

When using the internet, a performance contract is implied but frequently gets left out of content design consideration... it is an implied agreement that I will benefit from using a website. I've been surfing since 1993, when Mosaic browser first began supporting graphics. I've seen a few thousand web pages in my time, I'll explain why I feel some content is more notorious for violating that agreement.

1] One area of web design that seems to fail regarding my personal user experience is where a site is coded using only one presentation mechanism.

I refer to the trend whereby sites are, for example, Flash only. When I was running Internet Explorer, I visited many sites using my browser that I had reconfigured - swflash.ocx was removed. 2 things were most annoying: First, the only html content delivered to me was "You do not have Flash installed, click here to get Flash X.X"; Second, the incessant attitude I got whenever I emailed the sites webmaster about the lack of alternatives... I'd hear "Get flash or get lost".
I'm visiting the site in the manner which suits me, the visitor, best, and I get to see what amounts to webpage developer attitudes? Yes, I sympathize with the amount of work required to deliver content that is able to support all visitors, that is why I refuse to back down on certain points - a common denominator for all visitors is.... drumroll, please, static HTML. I gain very little information via zippy zoomy graphics, and as currently used, Flash delivers only uninformative advertisements. I'm a visitor seeking information, text with pictures is about all I need. The rest is merely blocking my path to my solution.

2] Then, along the same lines, comes the attitude from coding tool developers where the coding tools will implement browser specific tags.... and the people writing the web pages consequently take on the perspective that there is no way they are going to avoid using those tags.

Gee, thanks for the choices, folks.... Since I choose otherwise, your site fails to enrich me... I'm the visitor, but I am not up to the standards of your site? Falling into that category is the HTML extension which Microsoft added, the closed source ASP mentioned above, Microsofts .net environment, continuing today with a developing flap regarding RSS feeds, proprietary extensions to XML, etc. Honestly, if the whole web community felt that Microsofts input made sense, then there would be minimal if any differences of opinion, minimal dissention.... yet there is disagreement. And the webpage development community strives to support those features, it is promoting web dominance based on a few extra tricks from Microsoft. By not refusing to implement the tricks into their pages, the webpage development community is enforcing a dominance that closes the internet into an extension of a single entities reaches, via proprietary solution that are not openly available to every web user.

3] One last issue, IMO, is where web content delivered is based on restricting the visitor from saving the data.

I have mentioned above that Flash content excludes by not providing alternatives, but lets take that one step further. Lets visit a site with our Flash working properly. I have used Flash (despite my better judgement), only to discover that certain browser implemented user features are removed. I used to surf with Internet explorer, and when Flash was running (this is the reason for me deciding to remove Flash), I would lose the right mouse button features whenever I was acting on Flash content! So consider this: I liked the site, but in order to set a bookmark, I would have to avoid the right mouse button for bookmarking that site... I had to mouse through 2 or 3 menus in order to set a bookmark - how friendly! Further, I could not 'create a shortcut on desktop' for certain versions of Internet Explorer because some versions only provided the feature 'shortcut on desktop' via that right mouse button menu which Flash has taken control of. That Flash content now defeats my browsers features.
I have been told that the reason why Flash takes control of that menu is because the content should never be deliberately saved locally. I do not care the reasoning, if the content is displayed to me as information at any point in time, it is my right to refer to that information at a later point in time... a right to archive the content as a means of reference and support. DRM is exploring the content archive issue much further than how Flash accidentally implemented restrictions, but the point remains - as a web visitor, I saw what was presented, I based a decision on what I saw, and in cases where investigations need to refer to documents in the future, I will need a local archived copy of the data which I referred to - there is not one way where I, a web user, can trust the served content will remain unchanged for any longer duration than my browser cache of the data remains unchanged.

Crouse, you are showing here that there are choices and alternatives to such issues, and further, you hint that the open choices are becoming standards, I'm now a bit more grateful that php is available to me. If I understand correctly, when using server side content creation, the visitor will at least retain client side archive capabilities; definitely, php is beneficial there. I think, all in all, as a web user, that php becoming a standard method will serve both the visitor and developer communities.

[crouse]

http://www.iceteks.com/articles.php?act=view&cat=main&article=php&p=1&
Php how-to for starters

[shebang]

neat article, but can you include PERL as a server side techno. I mean it is more advanced than the languages up there. at least that's what i think.

_________________
Ubuntu Linux Feisty Fawn 7.04

[geeshock]

also if you are looking for a book I've used on by wrox called beginning php4. It's good to get you startede and has most of what I've needed to put php sites together.

One thing I like about php is you can create a form. Have it inter the information in a database as it supports mysql, postgress, oracle and even *gasp* ms sql if you chose to go that route. Once it makes that information it'll email you and let you know the information was entered and what was entered. You can actualy do these things in perl as well but php is probably much easier to comprehend in my book

[shebang]

heheh i always get the same answer whenever i ask people about why php is better "easier to use". WEll, that's your opinion and i highly respect it!

_________________
Ubuntu Linux Feisty Fawn 7.04

[geeshock]

yup, I'd recomend using and learning them both. I actualy prefer perl form many things. I've used a simple perl script to email everyone on my system using the /etc/passwd file.

[shebang]

Yes, yes. It's really useful for such purposes. Did you use "sendmail"??? If you want, I can send you a source code that can help you do this very easily I've been working on that lately.

_________________
Ubuntu Linux Feisty Fawn 7.04

[geeshock]

actualy we use exim but the /usr/bin/sendmail and /usr/sbin/sendmail links are there. As long as it's not using option specific to sendmail it should work. As I like to look at new things anyways I'd be happy to see the source code as my home puter runs sendmail

[shebang]

cool! Thanks! I will write it and send it as a PM. Me loves perl.

_________________
Ubuntu Linux Feisty Fawn 7.04

[geeshock]

Sounds good. I like looking at perl source and even modifying it. Of course I'll keep the original copy. Thank you.