On Sep 30, 2011 12:59 PM, "Rob Dixon" <rob.di...@gmx.com> wrote: > > On 30/09/2011 12:26, Shawn Wilson wrote: >> >> >> You validate data with js? Are you f*****g crazy? So, you think that >> >> if I want to hand you bad data I'm actually going to use your form to do it? > > > On the contrary, I think you are missing a few brain cells yourself > Shawn. Your friends at work may tolerate such obnoxious and juvenile > language, otherwise they wouldn't be your friends, but the members of > this list have a far higher price to pay to separate themselves from > your froth. >
Heh, the language actually had exactly the effect I was hoping. Your chances of remembering this exchange are much higher now than if I would have just said "please don't do this, its not very wise". Here's the point - some of you all are accomplished developers and some have a chance of getting there. You might be involved in a making an awesome service one day. I might even use a service you design one day. I don't have the time or energy to audit the public facing code for all the services I use. I trust that you're smart enough not to do stupid crap (or I don't use your service). Since this possibility of me giving you more of my information than I give most people is real, I felt to compelled to make my point as provocative as possible (plus it was early and the thought of doing client side validation really annoyed me). Also, the completely valid point was made that the validation wouldn't effect browsers that don't support js. This generally a moot point since 99% of the rest of a site won't work without js anyway. Either way, only use client side validation for client things. Don't trust anything done by or on behalf of the client on the server. Was that clean enough for you. Ps, I don't remember reading anywhere that insanities were not allowed? Iirc, the only mention of language was that this list is an English speaking list.
