Then no exposed code!
On Fri, 6 Oct 1995 22:20:47 -0400 Danyel Ceccaldi wrote:
>As I understood it, in which way you decide to provide
>HTML-code, if it is by giving a URL you will ever be able
>to view the code by an client which is able to recieve
>resources given by its URL.
>And even if you decide to implement your own client reading
>encrypted html-files not readable by other browsers,
>will be able to decrypt your encrypted files.
>If your only intention is to make sure that no one is
>resources linked by some anchors in your html-files, you
>configure your HTML-server to require the
>and providing data only if the link is activated from a
>Of course this will cause some problems, and isn't the
>but in general it should be a possibility to 'hide' resources from
>non-experts on the web.
>The other possibility is to create an own client who deals information
>in a way not compatible with HTML or HTTP.
>Anyway I don't know, if it would be better to move this discussion to
>a newsgroup related to this issue, because IMHO the only thing you can
>get from this mailing list is the information that in general you
>will be able to view any HTML-code located by a URL.
This message was sent (o o) 10/06/95 21:52:54 By
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-oOOo-(_)-oOOo-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ****** firstname.lastname@example.org
* ***** http://www.charm.net/~altera/
* * * email@example.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ++ STRONG ENOUGH
FOR A MAN, BUT MADE FOR A WOMAN ++