[Coco] cocomag project: Questions for the users

[John]

I'd rather have the second set of eyes on the output.  Just seems like the
final results would be worth it.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com [mailto:coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com] On
Behalf Of tim lindner
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:33 PM
To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts
Subject: Re: [Coco] cocomag project: Questions for the users

Joel Ewy <jcewy at swbell.net> wrote:

> I'd say that's generally what we want, but maybe it can be made more
> explicit whether one is looking at a second check or the first check.  I
> might fiddle around with spaces and whatnot just to make it look better,
> but I might be less inclined to mess around with trivial things if I
> knew it was the final check, and just let it go through if there weren't
> any real errors.  I dunno.

I have to admit I do this now. But only becuase I know the secret. :)
I'll put an explicit message as to which check it is. But here is the
secret:

View the source of the web page, and look for an hidden for field titled
"job". If the value is "A/..." then it is a first check, if it is
"B/..." then it is a second check.

I'll prolly remove this in a later version of the software. Letting the
client handle state is a security risk.

-- 
tim lindner
tlindner at macmess.org                                              Bright

--
Coco mailing list
Coco at maltedmedia.com
http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco