Thank you - I guess, then(?), it would not be a "bad" practice to substitute the AcitveX HTTP for the HTML HTTP!

I don't even know if there is a difference between the two! But with the activeX service the URL does not seem to show in the status bar.

Does JavaScript have (try/catch)? Something new every day.

>If you want this to work well you really need more complex code. Here's what I use in my framework code:
>
>

>function GetXmlHttp()
>{
> 	var Http = null;
>	if (typeof XMLHttpRequest != ""undefined"")
>    {
>		Http = new XMLHttpRequest();
>	}
>    else
>    {
>		try
>        {
>			Http = new ActiveXObject(""Msxml2.XMLHTTP"");
>		} catch (e)
>        {
>			try
>            {
>				Http = new ActiveXObject(""Microsoft.XMLHTTP"");
>			} catch (e) { }
>		}
>	}
>	return Http;
>}
>

>
>Msxml2.XmlHttp is the most generic reference so it should work on just about any machine.
>
>+++ Rick ---
>
>>My project includes a browser. The project script usually makes HTML HTTP requests. The browser creates a reference to MSDOM using javascript (ex):

var oXML=new ActiveXObject("MSXML2.DOMDocument.4.0")

>>I also experimented with the MS XML Messaging object:

var oHTTP=new ActiveXObject("MSXML2.XMLHTTP")

>>I liked it. The script was not flashed in the status bar.
>>
>>Are their prohibitions against using the messenger object (as opposed to standard "scripted" urls). Are the two methods different? Any advice appreciated.