Show data from other html page.

terryki
terryki used Ask the Experts™
on
How can I show a friends html page that shows golf results in one of my html pages.  I dont want to show just a 'link' but actually display the data within his page.  Sort of like if you were to show a news ticker tape (but without the scrolling, etc).  His page is say www.myresults.com and mine is www.mainpage.com is it through a GET method?

Many thanks for any help you may be able to give.
Comment
Watch Question

Do more with

Expert Office
EXPERT OFFICE® is a registered trademark of EXPERTS EXCHANGE®

Commented:
Hello,

you can use XML to "rip- off" content from other web pages. Is that what you mean? If so I'll dig some code out for you.

Mark

Commented:
Hello,

you can use XML to "rip- off" content from other web pages. Is that what you mean? If so I'll dig some code out for you.

Mark

Author

Commented:
Yes I think so!  I want to display his data within my page.  Many thanks for your help.
Ensure you’re charging the right price for your IT

Do you wonder if your IT business is truly profitable or if you should raise your prices? Learn how to calculate your overhead burden using our free interactive tool and use it to determine the right price for your IT services. Start calculating Now!

Commented:
OK, depending upon your hosting, their are some commercial componenst available to get data from other websites (ASPTear and ASPHTTP). The example below uses Microsoft's XMLHTTP component). Hope this helps. If not search on MSDN for XMLHTTP or on Google. There may be something in the XML forum here as well.
<%

Function GetHTML(strURL)
  Dim objXMLHTTP, strReturn
  Set objXMLHTTP = SErver.CreateObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP")

  objXMLHTTP.Open "GET", strURL, False
  objXMLHTTP.Send

  strReturn = objXMLHTTP.responseText
  Set objXMLHTTP = Nothing

  GetHTML = strReturn
End Function

' Write it:
Response.Write GetHTML("http://www.aspfaqs.com/")

' Download it:
Response.ContentType = "application/x-msdownload"
Response.AddHeader "Content-Disposition", "filename=Something.asp"
Response.BinaryWrite GetHTML("http://www.aspfaqs.com/")

%>
Or just use an IFRAME?

<iframe width="400" height="300" src="http://www.myresults.com/"></iframe>

Okay, so technically the page is not in your page, but it does seem a simpler option that should be good enough?

Commented:
Although IFRAME isn't (or wasn't) supported by Netscape...
I can guarantee that it works with:
-Internet Explorer 6.0
-Mozilla 1.2b
-Opera 6.04
-Netscape 6.2
Hell, even Lynx is capable of indicating that there is an IFRAME and shows http://www.myresults.com on the page.

If anyone is stupid enough to still be using Netscape 4.7, then that is their own fault...
I'd disagree. I ran into this before, and used your suggestion of IFRAME only. I soon found out that the world is full of people who simply just don't upgrade. Not everyone's a tech. There is a way to even support Netscape 4.7 by using <LAYER> and <NOLAYER> with <IFRAME></IFRAME within the <NOLAYER> tags.

I believe I used a solution similar to this:

<LAYER name="content" height=400 clip.bottom=400 clip.right=500 src="part1.htm">
</LAYER>
<NOLAYER>
<IFRAME id="content"
style="width:500; height:400"  src="part1.htm">
</IFRAME>
</NOLAYER>

Hope this helps.

-Matt
Maybe, but LAYER is not in the w3c standards, whilst IFRAME is.
Personally I support the 90% of sensible (IE) users, followed by the w3c standards, which covers over 95% of people.
If the minority don't want to upgrade, the minority will miss out. Afterall, it is this same minority which is preventing the web from evolving into what it should be.

Commented:
You can't tell you customers they are stupid for making their choices. If you want to lose pottential customers that's up to you.. I personally do use IFRAME because I hate layers (thet appear in different places according to browser and whether PC or MAC...) The XML way works and works with any browser because it's server side. A single browser makes it easier for programmers, in the same way that if everyone drove a Ford it'd be easier for mechanics and parts suppliers :-)

Mark

Commented:
This line does exactly what you want:

http://www.mikezilla.com/exp0011.html
markhoy is right. You can't tell your customers to just upgrade. And, even then, you can't tell your customers to tell their web site viewers "sorry." But his example is IE only, and pops up a security alert. Cool concept, though.

This is a simple problem. It doesn't really need to be complex until he intends to do more than just display a page within a page.

Goals:
     1) Support Browsers
     2) Embed an external web site within a page

<iframe src="http://www.myresults.com"
     width="500" height="300" scrolling="yes"><ilayer
     src="http://www.myresults.com"><a
     href="http://www.myresults.com">Browsers that don't support iframe or ilayer may click here</a></ilayer></iframe>

Will actually work better than my previous post. In theory it should support every browser, including the ones that don't support IFRAME or ILAYER -- at least they'll get a link to the golf results.

It is a GET method and entirely client side.

Additionally, more attributes may be assigned to ILAYER and IFRAME to basically get the perfect look that you want. Scrolling, etc. Here's a link to that information:

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/iframe.html

It only took me a few minutes to find the link.. and within the article I found that it basically describes exactly what I just stated above, which should help clarify this concept even more so.

Hope this helps!

-Matt
If I make a site for myself or someone else:
1) It will work in IE 6
2) It will be compliant with XHTML 1.1

If they want it to work in IE 5.5 or 5, sure - I'll avoid using IE6-specific code.
If they want it to be text only, fine, I can do that.

If they want it to work with an obsolete browser because someone is too lazy to download and install a small and free piece of stable software which has no disadvantages over the previous version and several enhancements, then they can do it themselves, because I have better things to waste my time on than making sending the web back another few steps.
Top Expert 2013

Commented:
Interesting discussion.  Support for the less than 5% still using the Netscrap relic; while at the same time proposing a solution with proposing a Micro$soft only solution server side that won't work on Apache.  Perhaps it might be a good idea to determine if the server in question is part of the 60% market share that Apache has.

Cd&
Top Expert 2013

Commented:
terriki,

do you have permission to use the content in question?  If not then I suggest you examine the morality of stealing someone else content without compensating them.  If you do have permission, then your friend should be able to give you the necessary db mapping that you need to script your requirements, and then they can just put the script on their server for you.

Cd&
Two interesting points made by COBOL recently. Hopefully, at least one of our solutions will help terry.

Rights. If it's his friend, and he's moving forward with this, then he has probably talked to him already. But noone knows. If not, then simply put, he should ask. :)

Support for the 5%. The last project that I worked with, I received 6 unique requests from client's viewers to support older Netscapes. My response was upgrade. Their response was to contact my client. My client was very upset that I didn't take into account these few percentages. This was a big deal.

I learned from this, and took into account the good long standing phrase 'The customer is always right.'

If the customer doesn't have a problem with a small % of people not being able to view their web site, then *shrug*, I really don't have a problem with it. But in the end, it *is* their decision. After all, if it is not, then your work could possibly be taken by someone who actually cares for what their client thinks.

As for myself, I at least attempt to support a viewable format for as many viewers as possible without severely limiting my options for development.

M$ only? Hey, it's the best browser I've seen, but I'd never dedicate entirely to it. Why bother supporting a power that would put no mind to taking your market share with simple manipulation.

Support'em entirely if ya want.. *shrug*.

I hope my example works on all browsers for ya, terry.

-Matt

Author

Commented:
thanks to everyone for all their help on this one.  Relax everyone I do have permission to link the content!!  I really appreciate everyones time on helping me get to a solution.

Terry.
Matt, if a client asked you to write a page with loads of horrible marquee and blink tags, annoying JavaScript things (such as popups for asking your name just to say "Welcome Peter", animated status messages, etc) unorganised and useless flash buttons and they want frames - what would you do?
I would refuse right there.
I would explain to them that there idea is ****. I would explain why it is, and what really impresses people on the web. If they didn't like that, then they could get SomeoneElse, and ideally SomeoneElse would tell them the same things until their brain finally accepted it.

I am not supporting MS only. I am supporting the 85% of the market that use Internet Explorer, the 10% that use Netscape6/Mozilla or Opera.
I am supporting the official standards.
I am not supporting a crappy obsolete browser which has NO advantages over other browsers at all and that should not really even be installed anywhere anymore.
Top Expert 2013

Commented:
I have a very simple approach to cross-browser support.  I give the client what they are willing to pay for.  I deliver a quote based on support for modern browsers.  If the client wants to support relics then that adds 30 to 50 percent depending on how much functionality they are prepared to dumb down.  If a client is will to blow 30% of their budget to support 5% of users, and give reduced funtionality to 95% of users, then fine I will deliver it that way.  I agree that the customer is always right, but that does not mean they are any less a moron.

As for a design that looks like crap.  I give them 3 options.  Use a design created by my staff;  clean up ther onw design to minimum professional standards; take the work to someone else.

Fortunately for me, 90% of the work I do is Browser enabled apps on private corporate networks, so standards, browser support and design issues are not part of the equation.

Cd&

It's a good point that everyone is making. I prefer to agree with COBOL on this -- let the client make the decision. Even at their own expense.

But, I also agree with mark that Netscrap relics should be gone with the wind. Noone should have them installed any more. It is outdated technology. Supporting it hampers the evolution of technology.

I, too, influence clients towards certain technologies, but in the end, I don't make those decisions. Especially if my clients are putting up product sites where that 5% could be a 5% decrease in sales on the site. The clients who pay my bills do. :)

I hope that our suggestions worked out terry!

-Matt
beleive it or not ---

NASA still uses NS4.7!!  too much tape to be constantly upgrading ...

as a consultant you can present alternatives, but as a professional you must respect the paying client's wishes - the customer isn't always right, but treat them as if they were, and they'll be a customer for life ...

thomasdodds
NASA also sent a space probe to Mars, or at least they *tried* to...

Not exactly a good example is it now?

Commented:
I've only got NS 4.7 as well and only IE5.5
Obviously boughtonp has enough work to turn customers away ;-)  if there are 300 million internet users 5% is still quite a few people. I'm sure most clients would prefer a solution that worked on 99% of browswers and compromised on the latest technology or coding (is your code W3 compliant?). You either want customers to buy something or read stuff. It's like saying "I'll only take VISA and not mastercard cos they charge a lower APR so you're stupid to use a higher interest credit card so i won't take your money...." If my customer has Netscape or a lower version of IE I'm not gonna tell them they're a relic get a newer version! I want their money so I'll make my code fit what THEY want not what I want. If I tell a mechanic to fit Pirelli tyres and he says "NO, I only fit Michelin" I'll go elsewhere (if I wanted Pirelli!).

Mark
my point was to let you know that not everyone has a choice to use the upgraded browsers...
But they do. Every system has (or should have) an administrator. NS4.7 has more bugs than NS6.2
Any admin should be able to see that they should upgrade...
never worked for the government have you? ;)
A lot of you seem to be worried about money.
I'm not.
I'm interesting in doing what is RIGHT.
No, I have morals. :P
Top Expert 2013

Commented:
This question has been abandoned. I will make a recommendation to the
moderators on its resolution in a week or two. I appreciate any comments
that would help me to make a recommendation.
<note>
   In the absence of responses, I may recommend DELETE unless it is clear
   to me that it has value as a PAQ.  Silence = you don't care
</note>

Cd&
Top Expert 2013

Commented:
It is time to clean this abandoned question up.  

I am putting it on a clean up list for CS.

<recommendation>
points to markhoy

</recommendation>

If anyone participating in the Q disagrees with the recommendation,
please leave a comment for the mods.

Cd&
Comment from expert accepted as answer

Computer101
E-E Admin

Do more with

Expert Office
Submit tech questions to Ask the Experts™ at any time to receive solutions, advice, and new ideas from leading industry professionals.

Start 7-Day Free Trial