Comments on: input type=”file” multiple; now in a real browser! http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser Cleaning up the web with Ajax Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:55:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: andysky http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-272612 andysky Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:50:43 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-272612 @akaj: Flash is a proprietary platform, that's the main reason why I avoid it at all costs in my webapps. @akaj: Flash is a proprietary platform, that’s the main reason why I avoid it at all costs in my webapps.

]]> By: icoloma http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271918 icoloma Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:04:15 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271918 @akaj: as a side note, in our office there are four linux-only developers were the flash player is unstable and will eventually stop working. More than that, not a single flash uploader has ever worked on our Ubuntu stations, ever. Ajax and native interfaces do not have these problems, so you are opening your systems to more users. @akaj: as a side note, in our office there are four linux-only developers were the flash player is unstable and will eventually stop working. More than that, not a single flash uploader has ever worked on our Ubuntu stations, ever.
Ajax and native interfaces do not have these problems, so you are opening your systems to more users.

]]> By: adele http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271896 adele Mon, 09 Mar 2009 22:21:41 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271896 @eyelidlessness: If you have any input managers installed for Safari, you may need to uninstall them to get this to work. @eyelidlessness: If you have any input managers installed for Safari, you may need to uninstall them to get this to work.

]]> By: akaJ http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271893 akaJ Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:38:40 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271893 @WebReflection: It's my fault, I though that it could be a place to grow my knowledge about webdev. If you know a better place for that tell me where. Plus, one don't say 'will do', but 'have done'. @WebReflection: It’s my fault, I though that it could be a place to grow my knowledge about webdev. If you know a better place for that tell me where. Plus, one don’t say ‘will do’, but ‘have done’.

]]> By: WebReflection http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271889 WebReflection Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:41:07 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271889 How did you guy ended up with the boring flame Flash VS JavaScript? This Safari 4 multiple files works like a charm. I already created two simple functions to send one or more files with new XMLHttpRequest events via handler Object ... it's great, it responds as well as FileReferences in AS does, and if you are patience this evening I'll write a post with a complete and simple example with progress bar and PHP on the server (few lines, really, no dependencies or libraries needed in both client and server side) I can't wait to see this implemented with the same W3 logic in both FireFox and Opera, good stuff Safari Team!!! How did you guy ended up with the boring flame Flash VS JavaScript?
This Safari 4 multiple files works like a charm. I already created two simple functions to send one or more files with new XMLHttpRequest events via handler Object … it’s great, it responds as well as FileReferences in AS does, and if you are patience this evening I’ll write a post with a complete and simple example with progress bar and PHP on the server (few lines, really, no dependencies or libraries needed in both client and server side)

I can’t wait to see this implemented with the same W3 logic in both FireFox and Opera, good stuff Safari Team!!!

]]> By: akaJ http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271888 akaJ Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:53:07 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271888 I agree with “web technology” and bulls eye arguments. The thing I want to understand is, whether or not you choose the (open)web-stack because it's technically better and *far* better in the long run. It looks like I have my answer. @TNO: you hit the point with "I can’t necessarily move my Flash application over to the IPhone", the fact is the real mobile application like latitude, ou gmap which really takes advantages of using tem from a cellular are made with "native" tools and don't run in the browser. Instead of getting mobile browser access to special devices like GPS or camera, they choose to use their own tools, and force developpers to deploy a new client and a relatively new server. It may be the choice of vendors like blackberry and apple, but not the choice of the dozens of mobile vendors. I agree with “web technology” and bulls eye arguments.

The thing I want to understand is, whether or not you choose the (open)web-stack because it’s technically better and *far* better in the long run. It looks like I have my answer.

@TNO: you hit the point with “I can’t necessarily move my Flash application over to the IPhone”, the fact is the real mobile application like latitude, ou gmap which really takes advantages of using tem from a cellular are made with “native” tools and don’t run in the browser. Instead of getting mobile browser access to special devices like GPS or camera, they choose to use their own tools, and force developpers to deploy a new client and a relatively new server. It may be the choice of vendors like blackberry and apple, but not the choice of the dozens of mobile vendors.

]]> By: ThomasHansen http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271886 ThomasHansen Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:52:39 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271886 @akaJ In addition to TNO's arguments (which are bulls eye) there's also the fact that Flash is when shit hits the fan nothing but ActiveX2.0 and a binary and proprietary format for creating what evil tongues (me among others) like to refer to as "distributed desktop applications" and ActiveX2.0 and has virtually nothing to do with what the same people mean when we refer to "web technology" .... ;) @akaJ
In addition to TNO’s arguments (which are bulls eye) there’s also the fact that Flash is when shit hits the fan nothing but ActiveX2.0 and a binary and proprietary format for creating what evil tongues (me among others) like to refer to as “distributed desktop applications” and ActiveX2.0 and has virtually nothing to do with what the same people mean when we refer to “web technology” …. ;)

]]> By: TNO http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271884 TNO Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:51:56 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271884 Almost forgot, I can't necessarily move my Flash application over to the IPhone or other mobile devices due to some policy restriction or incapability of the web browsing device. . Flash is also application centric, not document centric, so there are many hurdles in the way of me developing 100% in Flash for larger documents and content driven sites. I've also never seen a CMS system available for flash that doesn't make my wallet explode, so that's a huge killer for me as well. Almost forgot, I can’t necessarily move my Flash application over to the IPhone or other mobile devices due to some policy restriction or incapability of the web browsing device.
.
Flash is also application centric, not document centric, so there are many hurdles in the way of me developing 100% in Flash for larger documents and content driven sites. I’ve also never seen a CMS system available for flash that doesn’t make my wallet explode, so that’s a huge killer for me as well.

]]> By: TNO http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271883 TNO Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:45:17 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271883 @akaJ Regardless of the claims, Flash is not installed on 95% of client computers nor do they necessarily want it, whereas a browser that supports html4, some level of XSL and JavaScript is readily available. Some may claim that all you have to do is prompt the user to upgrade, but I don't see why you would have to if the browser contains what is needed to solve the problem in most, if not all situations. . The flash plugin comes with an overhead I always saw as unacceptable and most of the time unnecessary for what it would offer in return. I don't the need to waste 120k+ for a simple image flipper or navigation menu. . Accessibility and SEO is not as straightforward since its a binary format. Of course there is a workaround lately for that, but I don't see a reason to go through the effort when native markup can solve the problem with little involvement from me. . It doesn't promote open source. I can't right click on any Flash item I find and choose "View Source". . I don't want to pay for Adobe's development tools nor do I want to recompile code every time I make a minor change. . The ActionScript language will not be compliant with newer JavaScript versions and are walking down their own paths. I don't see a reason to invest significant time in ActionScript when ES3.1 and it's successors may in fact do the same job more succinctly if not better. Plus its backed by an international standard and will be supported by all significant browser vendors. . Flash will no longer be able to claim a significant speed advantage due to the recent advances in JavaScript JIT technology and browser backend support, especially when Mozilla and the others start moving to OpenGL in the near future. . Flash technology currently competes with Silverlight, JavaFX and the native browser, in the long term I see the browser winning since it has the lowest barrier for entry and lowest cost for development and minimal end user involvement. I don't see a reason to waste my time on a technology, and possibly a language which may be heading for a dead end, if not a not so popular future. @akaJ
Regardless of the claims, Flash is not installed on 95% of client computers nor do they necessarily want it, whereas a browser that supports html4, some level of XSL and JavaScript is readily available. Some may claim that all you have to do is prompt the user to upgrade, but I don’t see why you would have to if the browser contains what is needed to solve the problem in most, if not all situations.
.
The flash plugin comes with an overhead I always saw as unacceptable and most of the time unnecessary for what it would offer in return. I don’t the need to waste 120k+ for a simple image flipper or navigation menu.
.
Accessibility and SEO is not as straightforward since its a binary format. Of course there is a workaround lately for that, but I don’t see a reason to go through the effort when native markup can solve the problem with little involvement from me.
.
It doesn’t promote open source. I can’t right click on any Flash item I find and choose “View Source”.
.
I don’t want to pay for Adobe’s development tools nor do I want to recompile code every time I make a minor change.
.
The ActionScript language will not be compliant with newer JavaScript versions and are walking down their own paths. I don’t see a reason to invest significant time in ActionScript when ES3.1 and it’s successors may in fact do the same job more succinctly if not better. Plus its backed by an international standard and will be supported by all significant browser vendors.
.
Flash will no longer be able to claim a significant speed advantage due to the recent advances in JavaScript JIT technology and browser backend support, especially when Mozilla and the others start moving to OpenGL in the near future.
.
Flash technology currently competes with Silverlight, JavaFX and the native browser, in the long term I see the browser winning since it has the lowest barrier for entry and lowest cost for development and minimal end user involvement. I don’t see a reason to waste my time on a technology, and possibly a language which may be heading for a dead end, if not a not so popular future.

]]> By: akaJ http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271880 akaJ Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:47:34 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271880 @TNO: thanks for the link. But still, I don't understand. Flash & the Adobe stack don't fit the need of your projects ? You don't know Flash ? or the Open stack is the solution to your problems ? or maybe you fell part of the Open stack and the input that you can give on, make it a valuable feature for your bussiness ? @TNO: thanks for the link.

But still, I don’t understand. Flash & the Adobe stack don’t fit the need of your projects ? You don’t know Flash ? or the Open stack is the solution to your problems ? or maybe you fell part of the Open stack and the input that you can give on, make it a valuable feature for your bussiness ?

]]> By: TNO http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271877 TNO Sat, 07 Mar 2009 17:10:50 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271877 @akaJ: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/archives/2007/03/the_open_web_and_its_adversari.html @MarcDiethelm: I changed my mind and voted. @akaJ:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/archives/2007/03/the_open_web_and_its_adversari.html

@MarcDiethelm:
I changed my mind and voted.

]]> By: ashuvashu http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271875 ashuvashu Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:52:54 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271875 Hi there, I don't know but I am using Safari 4 beta on windows but I am not able to select multiple files is there any special way to declare input type? Please let me know . Thanks. Hi there,
I don’t know but I am using Safari 4 beta on windows but I am not able to select multiple files is there any special way to declare input type?

Please let me know .
Thanks.

]]> By: adele http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271873 adele Sat, 07 Mar 2009 06:27:49 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271873 @eyelidlessness: I don't think there are any known reports of this in WebKit's bug database. Would you mind filing one? https://bugs.webkit.org/ @AnM8tR: Some amount of styling should work. Try using this pseudo-element: input[type="file"]::-webkit-file-upload-button @eyelidlessness: I don’t think there are any known reports of this in WebKit’s bug database. Would you mind filing one? https://bugs.webkit.org/

@AnM8tR: Some amount of styling should work. Try using this pseudo-element: input[type="file"]::-webkit-file-upload-button

]]> By: akaJ http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271872 akaJ Sat, 07 Mar 2009 01:54:48 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271872 Honest question, you guys, why don't you use flash for everything ? where's the trick ? Honest question, you guys, why don’t you use flash for everything ? where’s the trick ?

]]> By: TNO http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271871 TNO Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:51:05 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271871 @MarcDiethelm . I do indeed have an account, and ironically, its not a high priority for me either, lol. (Most my votes go into JavaScript language features and bugs) @MarcDiethelm
.
I do indeed have an account, and ironically, its not a high priority for me either, lol. (Most my votes go into JavaScript language features and bugs)

]]> By: eyelidlessness http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271864 eyelidlessness Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:05:08 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271864 Most of us (at least on the Mac version) still can't use file inputs at all (eg they never open the file prompt). How weird that multiples work fine. I tested this, and it does not work. Most of us (at least on the Mac version) still can’t use file inputs at all (eg they never open the file prompt). How weird that multiples work fine. I tested this, and it does not work.

]]> By: MarcDiethelm http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271862 MarcDiethelm Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:35:19 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271862 @TNO: If you have a Bugzilla account you can vote for the bug. As did I. If a certain threshold is reached the priority of that bug will go up. @TNO: If you have a Bugzilla account you can vote for the bug. As did I. If a certain threshold is reached the priority of that bug will go up.

]]> By: SchizoDuckie http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271859 SchizoDuckie Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:56:48 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271859 I'm currently implementing Digitarald's MooTools / SWF based FancyUpload2 ( http://digitarald.de/project/fancyupload/ ) which is 100 times more awesome than this could ever be. You have events litterally everywhere and real progress bars, JSON responses and all you can ever wish for. It even works in Flash 10 now, and i've got it working in IE6, 7, 8, FF, Chrome, Webkit, opera *right now* Demo's here: http://digitarald.de/project/fancyupload/2-0/showcase/photoqueue/?sort=3 All i'm gonna do with it now is implement a nice Iframe fallback for those who have no flash or other problems I’m currently implementing Digitarald’s MooTools / SWF based FancyUpload2 ( http://digitarald.de/project/fancyupload/ ) which is 100 times more awesome than this could ever be.

You have events litterally everywhere and real progress bars, JSON responses and all you can ever wish for. It even works in Flash 10 now, and i’ve got it working in IE6, 7, 8, FF, Chrome, Webkit, opera *right now*

Demo’s here:
http://digitarald.de/project/fancyupload/2-0/showcase/photoqueue/?sort=3

All i’m gonna do with it now is implement a nice Iframe fallback for those who have no flash or other problems

]]> By: TNO http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271858 TNO Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:46:46 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271858 Mozilla has had this in the chute for a bit (<a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63687#c10" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63687#c10</a>), just wasn't a high priority I guess. Mozilla has had this in the chute for a bit (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63687#c10), just wasn’t a high priority I guess.

]]> By: AnM8tR http://ajaxian.com/archives/input-typefile-multiple-now-in-a-real-browser/comment-page-1#comment-271857 AnM8tR Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:15:14 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6215#comment-271857 Hmmm. I wonder if they'll let us style the button and field. Probably not. Can't tell by the commit. Instead of calling it a file uploader they should call it a pimple on your page. Hmmm. I wonder if they’ll let us style the button and field. Probably not. Can’t tell by the commit. Instead of calling it a file uploader they should call it a pimple on your page.

]]>