[kdewebdev-webdeveloper] Form Problem

[Graeme Nichols]

Eric Laffoon wrote:

>Strange,
>I've been so deluged with mail I haven't answer on other lists I missed 
>this...
>
>On Wednesday 23 February 2005 05:32 am, Hamster wrote:
>  
>
>>On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:43:39 +1100
>>
>>Graeme Nichols <gnichols at tpg.com.au> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Hi H., Thanks for the info and the offer of help but my ISP gives me
>>>10M  of web space and no sefver side scripting facilities at all. I
>>>checked  it out with them before I wrote the form. My HTML text book,
>>>'Web  Publishing with HTML 4 in 21 Days by Laura Lemay' indicates that
>>>the  mailto: works OK, but, unless I have coded something wrong, it
>>>doesn't  work OK.
>>>      
>>>
>>The problem is that the vast majority of those HTML books are written by
>>people who are good at making pretty pages as opposed to people who
>>actually have a clue about the technologies they're working with.
>>    
>>
>
>LMAO
>Well said my dear Hamster. You are a true jewel. Granted a jewel under a lot 
>of hair. ;-)
>  
>
>>Most of these authors aren't aware that OSs apart from MS exist, and
>>think the only two browsers in use are IE and Netscape.
>>
>>When a book makes a claim that something works, but in practise it
>>doesn't, the best thing to do is to view the actual W3C specification
>>for HTML.
>>
>>The forms page is found at
>>http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#adef-action
>>
>>For you, the most interesting sentence on that page is where the form
>>'action' is defined. It states:
>>
>><quote> User agent behavior for a value other than an HTTP URI is
>>undefined. </quote>
>>    
>>
>
>Makes you wish you could get a money back guarantee on these books and claim 
>it by whacking the author across the eyes with a 2x4 that would imprint "W3C" 
>permanently on them doesn't it?
>  
>
>>In a nutshell, anything other than action="http://" is not defined by
>>the specification and so will be different in each different webbrowser.
>>Which is why the mailto: only works for specific combinations of
>>webbrowser and mailclient.
>>    
>>
>
>There is however a solution where this will work with Javascript. I have it in 
>a Javascript book somewhere if you want to use that option. Just ask.
>  
>
Hello Eric, would you be so kind as to look up that option for me 
please. I would appreciate it.

Ta,

Graeme.

>>I see someone else has replied suggesting you make use of websites
>>offering form processing. Seems to me the best way to go.
>>
>>If you really run into problems, I can set up a page on my website that
>>emails you the results of the form submit. Provided of course you don't
>>expect thousands of responses :)
>>
>>H.
>>
>>    
>>
>Yes, this is very easy to do. You simply set the address to point to a site 
>that is not neutered and have it redirect to your result page after emailing 
>you. ;-)
>  
>


-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kind regards,

Graeme.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
X windows:
	We will dump no core before its time.
	One good crash deserves another.
	A bad idea whose time has come.  And gone.
	We make excuses.
	It didn't even look good on paper.
	You laugh now, but you'll be laughing harder later!
	A new concept in abuser interfaces.
	How can something get so bad, so quickly?
	It could happen to you.
	The art of incompetence.
	You have nothing to lose but your lunch.
	When uselessness just isn't enough.
	More than a mere hindrance.  It's a whole new barrier!
	When you can't afford to be right.
	And you thought we couldn't make it worse.

If it works, it isn't X windows.