<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Disable Submit? in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19027300</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:30:21 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:30:21 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Disable Submit?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19027300</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1018019"><b>pog</b></A> : Maybe they could come up with some neat examples of PHP using the same criteria to generate the JavaScript for the client as well as (re)validate on the server?<br><br>IOW, /form.php requested without variables returns the form.  The submit is back to /form.php but the presence of post/get variables triggers the validation?<br><br>I dunno but it should allow you to look kill both birds with the one stone.<br><br>Anyway, LiveValidation doesn't seem to address fields that get overlooked... for eg, the first example requires that text be entered.  Nothing stood out to alert me until I typed and then erased.  Surely, skipping fields is as big a problem as actual bad data entry?<br><small>--<br><A HREF="http://gopog.net/">My Site</a></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19027300</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:07:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Disable Submit?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19022267</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1"><b>justin</b></A> : It would be very difficult for the server-side to know for sure a client-side submit has been validated by a browser based library it has no control over. Anything javascript did as a trick such as passing back a token with the form saying "I checked this data and it is ok" could easily be copied as well.<br>You can't escape having to validate all fields all over again in PHP or Ruby or Perl or whatever, and then when you DO find a problem do you just reject the form silently, or do you re-display the form with neat error messages? which kind of makes the whole as-you-type validation redundant.<br><br>I suppose javascript on the server side is inevitable. If a web server integrated client and server side javascript into one seamless package you'd only be maintaining one set of code - the form could be validated twice by the same code.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19022267</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:28:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Disable Submit?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19021894</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/246096"><b>yock</b></A> : Couldn't you disable posting until the client-side validation is satisfied? I know this violates the "fail gracefully" principle of web design, but relying on client-side validation already does that anyway.<br><small>--<br>Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge<br>"The opposite of war isn't peace, it's creation."</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19021894</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2007 12:30:52 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
