I have always been confused about the word 'dedicated' as in /"dedicated RF links"/.

I've hit a snag. While requests to the API will work when using curl, NodeJS, Python, etc, they won't work from within a browser. This is because browsers make an OPTIONS request before the main request (known as the "CORS Preflight") and the server does not recognise OPTIONS requests (it responds with "403 Bad Method"). The request to /api/request_token does work because it is a "Simple request", but the request to /api/nodes fails because it has an Authorization header (which means it doesn't count as a "Simple request"). A good explanation about this can be found .

?

To fix this, the server should respond to OPTIONS requests with the header Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *

?

Even a different port on the same server counts as a different origin, so the error persists even if I serve the page from my node machine, as the web server can't use the same port as BPQ's web UI.

Sure. One thing I am a bit concerned about is the access_token process. For public information (such as the node list), this doesn't seem necessary at all, and as anyone can simply request a token without any authentication, doesn't actually provide any security, while adding an extra layer of complexity. It would be required when it comes to configuration data that's normally behind a login though (both getting and setting).

?

The other point is the expires_in key. I believe this should instead be expires_at, otherwise it's a bit confusing - does it mean 300 minutes from when the request was made, from when the response was sent, or when the response was received? This should also probably use UNIX epoch rather than minutes, e.g. { "access_token": "ABC123", "expires_at": 1728050700000 }. This would make the logic on the client much simpler as you would just check if the expires_at value is greater than the current time, to know if the token is still valid.

I've hit a snag. While requests to the API will work when using curl, NodeJS, Python, etc, they won't work from within a browser. This is because browsers make an OPTIONS request before the main request (known as the "CORS Preflight") and the server does not recognise OPTIONS requests (it responds with "403 Bad Method"). The request to /api/request_token does work because it is a "Simple request", but the request to /api/nodes fails because it has an Authorization header (which means it doesn't count as a "Simple request"). A good explanation about this can be found .

?

To fix this, the server should respond to OPTIONS requests with the header Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *

?

Even a different port on the same server counts as a different origin, so the error persists even if I serve the page from my node machine, as the web server can't use the same port as BPQ's web UI.

I've used the mail forwarding page as an example, mainly because it is one of the most complex pages in terms of layout. As this is just a prototype, I haven't spent much time on styling the page, but I have:

?

• Used a grid system for layout instead of tables.
• Tweaked the grid settings so that components take up varying amounts of space depending on the screen size.
• Added proper labels to form inputs (important for screen readers).
• Used proper input types (e.g. number instead of text, where appropriate).
• Removed a lot of superfluous tags such as <font> (styling is all handled in CSS).
• Made the main menu collapsible on screens < desktop.

?

Again, this is just a demo, so it doesn't actually function, and there is no JS functionality either at the moment (aside from the main menu).

?

Extract the .zip, open forwarding.html and resize your browser window from very narrow (like a mobile) up to full screen to see the content reflow.

I use ISFILTER m/. Work on map but not in Stations List.

Em qui., 3 de out. de 2024, 19:02, Mark Taylor via <mtaylor=[email protected]> escreveu:

Yes....

?

?ISFilter=m/0 ? ? ? ?; Filter Command if needed
; ISFilter=m/50 u/APBPQ* ? ?; Used in BPQAPRS mapping application as a default to add BPQ nodes wordwide.
; ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ; Adding this now when there are so many BPQ nodes increases network traffic
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ; unnecessarily!

?

There is a full list of filters available on

?

?

Yes....

?

?ISFilter=m/0 ? ? ? ?; Filter Command if needed
; ISFilter=m/50 u/APBPQ* ? ?; Used in BPQAPRS mapping application as a default to add BPQ nodes wordwide.
; ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ; Adding this now when there are so many BPQ nodes increases network traffic
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ; unnecessarily!

?

There is a full list of filters available on

?

?

my apologies.

?

i had a feeling, i couldn't express myself in a way that wouldn't stir the pot.

?

in reply, i see the same thing.

?

i do not see shortcomings where others do.

?

i do not see 'better' in the different where others do.

screen readers, one example, would break whenever something 'better' was introduced.

?

i am old, i understand that.

my masters is from the era of cobol and fortran 77.

?

my hobby was turbo pascal, writing doors for bbs systems.

?

i have no relevance in the actual writing of today's programs but as a user, i wanted to express my desire to keep a 'look and feel' that works for me.

?

again, my apologies, i'm QRT

:)

kb0wlf