Why is this the best way? It means that anyone without JavaScript
enabled cannot contact you. Spam is a pain, but not giving a user the
basic opportunity of contacting you is a bigger problem IMO.
I think mailto's and spam filters are the best way to go, as they are
accessible for everyone.
J
The best way is a form that also has a secure SPAM code or just make a image
that search engines cannot read...
I believe that people that does not have Javascript working are not
using internet
for the purpose i produce websites for, and im sorry we cant accept all
kind of users.
Also users
I guess it depends on the clients you have. We have several sites
getting over 100,000 hits a day, with around 5% of users not having
JavaScript enabled. To prevent this number of people from contacting us
is completely out of the question.
My belief is that the internet is for users, and as web
Michael,
What if JavaScript isn't enabled or available on my smartphone? I presume your
websites are not for people accessing the web while on the move, as well as
people whose preference or requirement is to use a web client without
JavaScript.
These standard[s] freaks you seem to think so
found it:
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/
Thanks!
On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:28, Joseph Ortenzi wrote:
Michael
You have made some mistaken assumptions.
Search engines are not spam email farmers, so there is no need to
PREVENT them from accessing your contacts page. You WANT them to see
My 2 cents: I'm one of those standards freaks. But when my clients became
overwhelmed with SPAM from their contact forms I had to bend the rules. And
when I say overwhelmed I'm talking about several hundred SPAM emails for
every one or two legitimate inquiries. I tried many standards compliant
On 16 Jun 2008, at 11:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
My 2 cents: I'm one of those standards freaks. But when my clients
became overwhelmed with SPAM from their contact forms I had to bend
the rules. And when I say overwhelmed I'm talking about several
hundred SPAM
Bottomline, what's the best solution?
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David Dorward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16 Jun 2008, at 11:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My 2 cents: I'm one of those standards freaks. But when my clients
became overwhelmed with SPAM from
A decent spam filter will get rid of most, if not all, of the junk - why not
encourage your clients to get a good spam filter or use an email client with
a good built-in filter?
Jason
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 8:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My 2 cents: I'm one of those standards freaks. But
Standards freaks are not against JavaScript, please pay attention there.
But Standardistas DO want sites to have a useful option available for
people who have javascript turned off so THEY can contact you as well.
So providing a server side form for people with Javascript turned off
would
Will noscript be an option in addtion to javascript solution, ofcourse
when javascript turned off, no. of users get spammed will be very minimal
may be 5-10 out of thousands.
Sundar
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Joseph Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Standards freaks are not against
Thanks Chris,
These options are like the options of what size your website should
have, and depending
on the target group your client have no idea for these technical matters
as well as web standards.
I am working to make internet a more accessible place to use from any device
but im also a
Dear Joe,
I know very well what web standards are but i have a point of view from
the clients
side, do the clients know what web standards are and do they really care
to pay for
something they dont want to pay for!!!
Now we have another view of the situation... Im not located in a higly
On Jun 16, 2008, at 13:08, Michael Persson wrote:
Thanks Chris,
These options are like the options of what size your website should
have, and depending
on the target group your client have no idea for these technical
matters as well as web standards.
You should have a target display
Michael said:
Are you willing to work 3 days extra for each project to implement the
usability / accessibility regulations in order to follow the web standard
in order to create a better website that the client will not pay for or
even understand what they are paying for...??
I try to quote
Rubbish.
I have plenty of experience of commercial-grade spam filters, and when
95% of received mail is spam, you don't have a hope of getting it all,
unless you want to block a significant portion of legitimate mail as
well.
Mike
From: [EMAIL
On 16 Jun 2008, at 14:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Rubbish.
I have plenty of experience of commercial-grade spam filters, and
when 95% of received mail is spam, you don't have a hope of getting
it all, unless you want to block a significant portion of legitimate
Dear Chris,
I could not said it better myself. I am alone front end developer and
technical responsible for the projects
we are creating in the company i work. I have tried to implement web
standards, accessibility and usability
for the last 2 years but sometimes I am just chopped by the
Michael,
In many ways we are the lucky ones - if you are doing SQL server day to
day, or pretty much anything other than HTML then there are no standards
at all - just 'on time/budget' or 'not/fired'.
Stuff like SOX has given some impetus to doing things 'the right way'
instead of the quick way,
Michael,
I understand where you're coming from, but your original message did not come
across like that at all. Of course budgets will be cut, deadlines brought
forward, other responsibilities heaped on you etc. That's the nature of
business. However wherever possible standard and
Hi all,
Just to throw another one in the mix.
How about using flash as they did on actionscript.org - a little .swf which
shows the email as selectable text when clicked on?
I guess this is even less accessible though, as it ostracizes not only those
without js enabled, but also those
So does everyone agree that the form is the best option for entire
cross - situation compatibility?
James
I think that is really an individual decision - a simple contact form on
its own has a number of usability issues, which are well documented
elsewhere. For the user there is the lack of
Does anyone have a clever full functional solution for this
transparency crap to make work ?
I know it's a rather old thread but I just came across a nice solution
which does not even need an iepngfix.htc Javascript.
One template I work on required a semitransparent background. I have it
Even that site resource advise's to use the htc approach. I use this on a
number of website and it works really well. I attach it to a style sheet for
IE6 or below that way my CSS still passes validation.
http://bjorkoy.com/past/2007/4/8/the_easiest_way_to_png/
-Original Message-
From:
... and all of them ultimately rely on AlphaImageLoader, which (as I
mentioned elsewhere) runs the risk of the sort of problems discussed
at http://blogs.cozi.com/tech/2008/03/transparent-png.html?cid=106552420
- Korny
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Jens-Uwe Korff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
I used a javascript call IE7.
And it works in IE6.
http://code.google.com/p/ie7-js/
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Michael Persson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HI people,
I have tried to not use transparency for years as it is not working IE6
properly.
I have not a situation where i need
http://spirit.q9-gaming.com/en/?p=37
A re-arranged article about that.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Caleb Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used a javascript call IE7.
And it works in IE6.
http://code.google.com/p/ie7-js/
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Michael Persson [EMAIL
27 matches
Mail list logo
