Comments on: Webslices and Revisiting Microsummaries http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/2008/03/webslices-and-microsummaries/ Sci-fi, comics, humor, photos...it's all fair game. Wed, 23 May 2012 18:19:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: What’s Dynamic About It? | K-Squared Ramblings http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/2008/03/webslices-and-microsummaries/#comment-40422 What’s Dynamic About It? | K-Squared Ramblings Sat, 15 Mar 2008 06:30:16 +0000 http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/03/13/webslices-and-microsummaries/#comment-40422 [...] my post on Webslices, I mentioned that the home page of my Flash site uses server-side includes instead of a static HTML [...] [...] my post on Webslices, I mentioned that the home page of my Flash site uses server-side includes instead of a static HTML [...]

]]> By: Kelson http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/2008/03/webslices-and-microsummaries/#comment-40409 Kelson Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:10:53 +0000 http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/03/13/webslices-and-microsummaries/#comment-40409 You're welcome! I figured it was probably just a matter of it being pre-pre-pre-alpha, but thought I'd double-check the Webslice spec (when I found the time) just in case it required FQDNs or something. Thanks for developing the extension. It's always nice to have two implementations to compare. You’re welcome! I figured it was probably just a matter of it being pre-pre-pre-alpha, but thought I’d double-check the Webslice spec (when I found the time) just in case it required FQDNs or something.

Thanks for developing the extension. It’s always nice to have two implementations to compare.

]]> By: Daniel Glazman http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/2008/03/webslices-and-microsummaries/#comment-40404 Daniel Glazman Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:56:18 +0000 http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/03/13/webslices-and-microsummaries/#comment-40404 wrt relative links, that's absolutely correct, and it's only because I forgot to implement it in the case of in-page slices. Thanks for the heads up. wrt relative links, that’s absolutely correct, and it’s only because I forgot to implement it in the case of in-page slices. Thanks for the heads up.

]]>